Ambiguous wording in policy manual

[Redneck_Buddha]

I know that generally an employer's policy manual can override the absence of a 30.06 sign. Here is the wording in our policy manual. What is your take on this passage?

Under a section called "Workplace Violence Prevention":

"...Firearms, weapons, and other dangerous or hazardous devices or substances are prohibited from the premises of the company unless contrary to state law."

Do you read this as implicit recognition of an employees CHL? Thanks!

[3dfxMM]

No. I read that as "you can't have those things here unless state law says we can't prevent you from doing so."

[jollyman]

Exactly!

[C-dub]

I know that generally an employer's policy manual can override the absence of a 30.06 sign. Here is the wording in our policy manual. What is your take on this passage?

Under a section called "Workplace Violence Prevention":

"...Firearms, weapons, and other dangerous or hazardous devices or substances are prohibited from the premises of the company unless contrary to state law."

Do you read this as implicit recognition of an employees CHL? Thanks!

It might if you work for a city, county, or state. There is another thread around here about some city changing their policy to something like this to allow those with CHLs to carry at work.

[bizarrenormality]

Do you read this as implicit recognition of an employees CHL? Thanks!

No. I read it as recognition of the parking lot law.

[dac1842]

IN reading this policy, and being someone that has had to enforce company rules and polices, I would apply state law definition of premises. Which means you may leave it in your car, but not in the buildings and property under the care, custody and control of the company. Property, for the company I used to work with meant property that the company leased or rented, including off company property meetings, hotel rooms and banquets.

[cheezit]

ours is worded the same. thrn there is a subnote that address parking lot type bill. basicly it same all firearms kept in the parking lot must be not be loaded, must be in a locked container seperate from the ammo.

so basicly they want us to come to work and fondle with are guns in an unlit parking lot early in the morning.. chambering and rechambering the same rounds all in the name of safty.

[GWE Chally]

ours is worded the same. thrn there is a subnote that address parking lot type bill. basicly it same all firearms kept in the parking lot must be not be loaded, must be in a locked container seperate from the ammo.

so basicly they want us to come to work and fondle with are guns in an unlit parking lot early in the morning.. chambering and rechambering the same rounds all in the name of safty.

But, isn't that contrary to state law? The state law doesn't say anything about the condition of the gun, only that it not be in plain sight. I don't think the company policy would hold up if scrutinized. JMO

[Jumping Frog]

I know that generally an employer's policy manual can override the absence of a 30.06 sign. Here is the wording in our policy manual. What is your take on this passage?

Under a section called "Workplace Violence Prevention":

"...Firearms, weapons, and other dangerous or hazardous devices or substances are prohibited from the premises of the company unless contrary to state law."

Do you read this as implicit recognition of an employees CHL? Thanks!

It has three effects:

1. Anyone illegally possessing firearms or weapons can be charged criminally and fired.
2. CHL's cannot be charged criminally as there is no 30.06 language constituting notice.
3. CHL's can be fired for violating company policy.

[Redneck_Buddha]

I know that generally an employer's policy manual can override the absence of a 30.06 sign. Here is the wording in our policy manual. What is your take on this passage?

Under a section called "Workplace Violence Prevention":

"...Firearms, weapons, and other dangerous or hazardous devices or substances are prohibited from the premises of the company unless contrary to state law."

Do you read this as implicit recognition of an employees CHL? Thanks!

It has three effects:

1. Anyone illegally possessing firearms or weapons can be charged criminally and fired.
2. CHL's cannot be charged criminally as there is no 30.06 language constituting notice.
3. CHL's can be fired for violating company policy.

Thanks! Guess I'll start working remote now.

[Texas Sheepdog]

It doesn't sound ambiguous to me. Company policy prohibits weapons and they can fire you, unless the law says they can't fire you. Parking lot protection is one example.

[Redneck_Buddha]

It doesn't sound ambiguous to me. Company policy prohibits weapons and they can fire you, unless the law says they can't fire you. Parking lot protection is one example.

We can agree to disagree on this one. IMO, it could be worded much more explicitly. I believe Jumping Frog's response was the best at disambiguating the language.