TexasCHLforum.com

dhoobler wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2019 10:53 am Attorney General opinion GA 972:

https://www2.texasattorneygeneral.gov/o ... ga0972.pdf

No statute of which we are aware provides a specific remedy for employees whose employers violate section 52.061. And the Legislature has not authorized this office or any other state agency to take corrective action. Despite the lack of a statutory remedy, an aggrieved employee may, depending on the circumstances, have the ability to sue an offending employer under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act.

Can someone interpret this for us non-lawyer types?

My layperson reading is that termination on this basis would be a violation of law. That violation does not have a proscribed penalty, but you could sue for damages that result from this illegal act (like lost wages, costs of finding a new job, etc). Is this kinda sorta correct?

oohrah wrote: ↑Wed May 29, 2019 6:17 am The problem will be that it will be hard to prove wrongful termination since Texas is an “at will” state. They don’t have to give any reason for firing you. The parking lot law only protects you from prosecution for trespass, or other prosecution. IANAL.

IANAL either, but I'm almost certain that the bolded part is incorrect. The parking lot law explicitly protects you against termination on the basis of having a stored weapon in your vehicle.

I do agree that it will be difficult to prove, but having a written document stating their intent to use this as the basis for termination should be pretty strong evidence. Especially coupled with the fact that a termination occurred shortly after a firearm was discovered in your car. It would be equivalent to being fired for being Jewish. Difficult to prove. But made much easier if the company was dumb enough to have you sign a written document that stated you would be terminated if discovered to be of that faith. (This is just an example, and I picked a religion at random).

In fact, since the company apparently believes they can terminate employees on this basis, they might not even hide their reasoning in the first place.