How to convince your employer to allow CHL carry

[mloamiller]

I found this response to one of my questions at http://txconcealedcarry.com/your-employ ... hl-rights/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;:

"If the employee manual/handbook doesn't have the required wording of 30.06, and the person hasn't receive notice verbally and no sign is posted that meets 30.06’s requirements then the person is in violation of policy, not the law."

Based on my understanding of the relevant portions of the penal code, this is correct. If anyone knows differently, please chime in, with references.

[chamberc]

I found this response to one of my questions at http://txconcealedcarry.com/your-employ ... hl-rights/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;:

"If the employee manual/handbook doesn't have the required wording of 30.06, and the person hasn't receive notice verbally and no sign is posted that meets 30.06’s requirements then the person is in violation of policy, not the law."

Based on my understanding of the relevant portions of the penal code, this is correct. If anyone knows differently, please chime in, with references.

You're correct, you're not violating the law, but they can definitely terminate your employment.

[mloamiller]

Hope it works for you, just know that you might poison the well in the process.

I thought about that, but I’m not sure what the downside could be. We’re already prohibited from carrying in the building, and Texas law allows me to keep my gun in my car. I had intended to submit my suggestion anonymously just to protect myself from that possible “ferreting”, but other than that, I’m not sure what else they could do. Am I missing something?

There actually is a downside.

I think, but not sure if it was on this board or another one, where someone's employer starting asking employees if they had a CHL. The threat, real or implied, was that if you lie to us and say you don't or we find out somehow that you do have a CHL and don't tell us, you will be terminated.

It's not just some government officials, journalists and billionaire hacks that want to relieve you of your right to defend yourself, but some employers can be just as rabid...depends on the politics of the company. I'm just saying to think about the best and worst things that might happen....reality will be somewhere in the middle or even worse than you thought.

Just my 2 cents.

LabRat

There's another downside that occurred to me after reading the replies in this post. As it is now, the prohibition in the employee manual is not legally-binding (not 30.06 compliant). Therefore, if I do chose to carry at work, I'm violating company policy, but not the law. If I raise the issue with HR, they may start researching this and decide to update the handbook to include the 30.06 verbiage. At that point, it does become a legal issue.

Of course, there is always the possibility of being fired, should they find out, even as it stands now. However, that's always a possibility for a variety of reasons - layoffs/downsizing, buyouts, getting on the wrong side of your boss, or his boss, etc. At least the status quo does not include potential legal issues. Not that a livelihood isn't important, of course, but adding the legal question does raise the stakes.

Given that it is extremely unlikely the company is going to change their minds, I think there is more potential for harm than good by raising the question. I think I'll just stay quite at this point.

[VMI77]

Has anyone ever successfully convinced their employer, who has “no guns, even for CHLs” stated in the employee handbook, to allow licensed concealed carry on their premises? Either that, or at least a good template of a letter that includes the basic points (e.g. signs can’t protect anyone, CHLs are law-abiding, etc.)

Our company specifically prohibits concealed-carry on-premises even for CHLs. I was thinking about putting a letter in their suggestion box asking them to remove the CHL-specific restriction. I figured that if someone else has already put such a letter together, why start from scratch?

I don't know what motivated the change, but our employee manual used to say CHL holders may not carry guns on company property. Then one day someone in management told me to look at the policy manual and it now says "CHL holders may carry guns on company property." I have no idea what motivated the change, but a while after that, the company even sponsored a CHL class for employees, on site (except for the range part).

[Glockster]

Has anyone ever successfully convinced their employer, who has “no guns, even for CHLs” stated in the employee handbook, to allow licensed concealed carry on their premises? Either that, or at least a good template of a letter that includes the basic points (e.g. signs can’t protect anyone, CHLs are law-abiding, etc.)

Our company specifically prohibits concealed-carry on-premises even for CHLs. I was thinking about putting a letter in their suggestion box asking them to remove the CHL-specific restriction. I figured that if someone else has already put such a letter together, why start from scratch?

I don't know what motivated the change, but our employee manual used to say CHL holders may not carry guns on company property. Then one day someone in management told me to look at the policy manual and it now says "CHL holders may carry guns on company property." I have no idea what motivated the change, but a while after that, the company even sponsored a CHL class for employees, on site (except for the range part).

I hope that you took the opportunity to express how much you appreciated the company's position, how important it is to you to work for a company that has the same values and is supportive of your rights, and so on. All too often we hear about the companies that restrict or prohibit to the point that you can forget about the good ones -- letting the management know that you appreciate what they have done and are doing is important.

[ScooterSissy]

...
Also, if I forbid firearms in the workplace and a poor misguided Yute undertakes a gibsmedat performance that results in the death of one of my employees, I am not going to be liable for the wrongful actions of a criminal. Worst case scenario is the death gets handled within the workers compensation system places which has definite limits on the size of the loss due to a workplace death.

(my emphasis added)
I'm curious about that statement. I know this is probably going slightly off-topic, but I wonder. I'm still waiting for the day (and I have little doubt that it will eventually come), when someone who has been injured, or a family member of someone that has been killed says (in court)

I have the right to keep and bear arms, and it was codified in the US Constitution.
It was further codified under Texas law, and I followed that law and got the proper certification to carry a weapon to protect myself.
Then my employer forbade me to exercise those rights while I was employed, and failed to provide the same level of protection that he took away from me and as a result, I was seriously injured by a gunman at work, and am seeking damages.

[VMI77]

...
Also, if I forbid firearms in the workplace and a poor misguided Yute undertakes a gibsmedat performance that results in the death of one of my employees, I am not going to be liable for the wrongful actions of a criminal. Worst case scenario is the death gets handled within the workers compensation system places which has definite limits on the size of the loss due to a workplace death.

(my emphasis added)
I'm curious about that statement. I know this is probably going slightly off-topic, but I wonder. I'm still waiting for the day (and I have little doubt that it will eventually come), when someone who has been injured, or a family member of someone that has been killed says (in court)

I have the right to keep and bear arms, and it was codified in the US Constitution.
It was further codified under Texas law, and I followed that law and got the proper certification to carry a weapon to protect myself.
Then my employer forbade me to exercise those rights while I was employed, and failed to provide the same level of protection that he took away from me and as a result, I was seriously injured by a gunman at work, and am seeking damages.

Ah, if the system and outcomes were actually based in law, logic, and reason. Unfortunately outcomes are based in money, power, and politics. The default position is what's easiest and cheapest for big corporations and associated money players.

[ScooterSissy]

My situation is a little different from most. I work for a city government. Therefore any Joe CHL off the street can carry inside my building and even walk in my office. But I can NOT because it is written in our city directives that no handguns for city employees except police. Now I can leave my gun in a secured vehicle in the parking lot, but can't carry on my person while "on the clock". Many guys at my office have there CHLs and many know who do or don't. In fact, a couple of the "big bosses" have theirs. Because it is a city wide directive, it would have to go to the city council to be voted on to allow city employees to carry. That ain't gonna happen! I feel I "could" carry legally, but be fired if caught. I have 22 years in already and plan on retiring at 30, so for now, I'm not rocking the boat. It just frustrates me that anyone with a CHL can carry in my office, but I can't!

Find a friendly neighbor who is willing start going head to head with the City Council over it. I know if that was put on the agenda in my city, there'd be a ton of people standing up insisting on it.

[ScooterSissy]

...
Also, if I forbid firearms in the workplace and a poor misguided Yute undertakes a gibsmedat performance that results in the death of one of my employees, I am not going to be liable for the wrongful actions of a criminal. Worst case scenario is the death gets handled within the workers compensation system places which has definite limits on the size of the loss due to a workplace death.

(my emphasis added)
I'm curious about that statement. I know this is probably going slightly off-topic, but I wonder. I'm still waiting for the day (and I have little doubt that it will eventually come), when someone who has been injured, or a family member of someone that has been killed says (in court)

I have the right to keep and bear arms, and it was codified in the US Constitution.
It was further codified under Texas law, and I followed that law and got the proper certification to carry a weapon to protect myself.
Then my employer forbade me to exercise those rights while I was employed, and failed to provide the same level of protection that he took away from me and as a result, I was seriously injured by a gunman at work, and am seeking damages.

Ah, if the system and outcomes were actually based in law, logic, and reason. Unfortunately outcomes are based in money, power, and politics. The default position is what's easiest and cheapest for big corporations and associated money players.

I agree completely, that's why I'm hoping someday, just such a lawsuit arises, and the company loses (as they should). I think a big hit in the pocketbook, and the threat of it happening to others, would change some "placate the nanny-staters who yell the loudest" types at the corporate level.

[MeMelYup]

My situation is a little different from most. I work for a city government. Therefore any Joe CHL off the street can carry inside my building and even walk in my office. But I can NOT because it is written in our city directives that no handguns for city employees except police. Now I can leave my gun in a secured vehicle in the parking lot, but can't carry on my person while "on the clock". Many guys at my office have there CHLs and many know who do or don't. In fact, a couple of the "big bosses" have theirs. Because it is a city wide directive, it would have to go to the city council to be voted on to allow city employees to carry. That ain't gonna happen! I feel I "could" carry legally, but be fired if caught. I have 22 years in already and plan on retiring at 30, so for now, I'm not rocking the boat. It just frustrates me that anyone with a CHL can carry in my office, but I can't!

Find a friendly neighbor who is willing start going head to head with the City Council over it. I know if that was put on the agenda in my city, there'd be a ton of people standing up insisting on it.

Find people like minded with you in each of the council districts and talk them into running for the council seats.

[VMI77]

Has anyone ever successfully convinced their employer, who has “no guns, even for CHLs” stated in the employee handbook, to allow licensed concealed carry on their premises? Either that, or at least a good template of a letter that includes the basic points (e.g. signs can’t protect anyone, CHLs are law-abiding, etc.)

Our company specifically prohibits concealed-carry on-premises even for CHLs. I was thinking about putting a letter in their suggestion box asking them to remove the CHL-specific restriction. I figured that if someone else has already put such a letter together, why start from scratch?

I don't know what motivated the change, but our employee manual used to say CHL holders may not carry guns on company property. Then one day someone in management told me to look at the policy manual and it now says "CHL holders may carry guns on company property." I have no idea what motivated the change, but a while after that, the company even sponsored a CHL class for employees, on site (except for the range part).

I hope that you took the opportunity to express how much you appreciated the company's position, how important it is to you to work for a company that has the same values and is supportive of your rights, and so on. All too often we hear about the companies that restrict or prohibit to the point that you can forget about the good ones -- letting the management know that you appreciate what they have done and are doing is important.

Where I work I highly doubt there are more than one or two people out of a hundred that don't own guns. Our most liberal employee (that I know of anyway -an actual Obama voter, at least the first time) was the head guy and he had a CHL and carried. My office is decorated with large photos of guns along with my NRA life member certificate and various NRA decals. I don't know for sure how many have CHL's but I know many who do have them....maybe as many as 15-20% of those working in my building. Female employees have openly stated in company meetings that they intend to carry a gun when they have to go on business trips. The people I work with are pretty much part of the gun and self-defense culture --even those without CHLs....and management knows it.

[Glockster]

Has anyone ever successfully convinced their employer, who has “no guns, even for CHLs” stated in the employee handbook, to allow licensed concealed carry on their premises? Either that, or at least a good template of a letter that includes the basic points (e.g. signs can’t protect anyone, CHLs are law-abiding, etc.)

Our company specifically prohibits concealed-carry on-premises even for CHLs. I was thinking about putting a letter in their suggestion box asking them to remove the CHL-specific restriction. I figured that if someone else has already put such a letter together, why start from scratch?

I don't know what motivated the change, but our employee manual used to say CHL holders may not carry guns on company property. Then one day someone in management told me to look at the policy manual and it now says "CHL holders may carry guns on company property." I have no idea what motivated the change, but a while after that, the company even sponsored a CHL class for employees, on site (except for the range part).

I hope that you took the opportunity to express how much you appreciated the company's position, how important it is to you to work for a company that has the same values and is supportive of your rights, and so on. All too often we hear about the companies that restrict or prohibit to the point that you can forget about the good ones -- letting the management know that you appreciate what they have done and are doing is important.

Where I work I highly doubt there are more than one or two people out of a hundred that don't own guns. Our most liberal employee (that I know of anyway -an actual Obama voter, at least the first time) was the head guy and he had a CHL and carried. My office is decorated with large photos of guns along with my NRA life member certificate and various NRA decals. I don't know for sure how many have CHL's but I know many who do have them....maybe as many as 15-20% of those working in my building. Female employees have openly stated in company meetings that they intend to carry a gun when they have to go on business trips. The people I work with are pretty much part of the gun and self-defense culture --even those without CHLs....and management knows it.

Sounds like you've got a great thing going on there.

[Texasdoesitbest]

My employer does not know I have a CHL (or soon will be having one its on its way to me). Do I have to ask him if I can carry while working or can I carry and if he finds out and tells me not to then obviously listen? We dont have a 30.06 sign and we would never as we are a defense criminal law practice. We actually defend people with CHL or UCW related charges. I dont think the firm partner will mind but I'm just wondering if it has to be disclosed before carrying. I'm also aware that the "castle doctrine" for lack of better terms, allows me to carry in place of employment.

Thoughts?

[jmra]

My employer does not know I have a CHL (or soon will be having one its on its way to me). Do I have to ask him if I can carry while working or can I carry and if he finds out and tells me not to then obviously listen? We dont have a 30.06 sign and we would never as we are a defense criminal law practice. We actually defend people with CHL or UCW related charges. I dont think the firm partner will mind but I'm just wondering if it has to be disclosed before carrying. I'm also aware that the "castle doctrine" for lack of better terms, allows me to carry in place of employment.

Thoughts?

You do not legally have to tell your employer. Check your handbook. If it has 30.06 language you can not carry. If it says no guns you can carry but if found out you can be fired.

[Keith B]

My employer does not know I have a CHL (or soon will be having one its on its way to me). Do I have to ask him if I can carry while working or can I carry and if he finds out and tells me not to then obviously listen? We dont have a 30.06 sign and we would never as we are a defense criminal law practice. We actually defend people with CHL or UCW related charges. I dont think the firm partner will mind but I'm just wondering if it has to be disclosed before carrying. I'm also aware that the "castle doctrine" for lack of better terms, allows me to carry in place of employment.

Thoughts?

If you have an employee handbook that says 'no firearms', then you would be breaking policy and could be fired. If they have told you verbally or have written notification in the handbook in the form of Texas Penal Code 30.06, then you would be breaking the law without permission from the owner/partner.