Different Twist on an Old Question

Where I work has a clearly defined policy regarding firearms and the workplace. You are NOT allowed to have a firearm on company property. My company leases the building where I am , which makes it their property.

Recently we have experienced a shortage of parking so they have contacted a neighboring business to "rent" parking from them.

The business is a Burger King. Our "rented" spots are not clearly defined within the BK lot. Since it is "rented" with no defined spots, would you consider the whole parking lot off limits for me to have my firearm in my vehicle?

This opens many questions for me. I sure wish HB5064 ?I believe that was the one) moved forward.

I"m not sure how thing work with private employers, other than the fact they can fire you without any reason, or any reason they choose, as long as it is not one of the legally protected things like age, sex, race, etc. Even if you parked on private property and walked a half a mile to work, they could still fire you. The law offers no protection from a private employer when as an employee you violate their policy in regards to having a firearm in your vehicle.

If you worked for a local unit of government, then they only have the authority to ban firearm possession basically anytime that you are covered by workers compensation. This is actually quite complicated because we have to rely on court cases to determine when you are or are not covered by workers comp.

Our company does not really fall into "at will" as we have employment contracts. Contract law supersedes. There is a process for termination. Violating the weapons policy errrrr... I mean their "workplace violence" policy is cause for "up to" termination.

Blasted out with my Photon using Tapatalk

Hmmmm - good question.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcAxs5l1cO0

I can find no Corporate policy for Burger King? I know some have carried there without issue & others have not been so lucky. Now in your case your company says they are renting the spaces, so I would guess that if this went to court the court would side with your companies policy that would transfer to the rented area, just as if they rented a satellite office away from their main facility. This is just a guess though as I find that often Judges rule/legislate from the bench with no basis in law whatsoever See MOC v. CADL

I would tend to lean the other way on this one. IF...the parking spaces are NOT marked and are only rented "as available" to a designated portion of the lot, then I would say you are good to go with the permission of the burger king manager. Otherwise; if a patron were to park in one of these unmarked spots, his vehicle may be towed by the renter. But that couldn't be enforced in an unmarked area.

JMO

Okay - Call the Venator for a tie breaker

WARCHILD said:

I would tend to lean the other way on this one. IF...the parking spaces are NOT marked and are only rented "as available" to a designated portion of the lot, then I would say you are good to go with the permission of the burger king manager. Otherwise; if a patron were to park in one of these unmarked spots, his vehicle may be towed by the renter. But that couldn't be enforced in an unmarked area.

JMO

Click to expand...

Yeah in my experience the minute you ask a manager their automatic response is to say no (CYA) until they are told otherwise, but I don't wear a "power hat" like you WARCHILD so it could just be that wardrobe deficency that has lead to these (few) wrinkles.

For those of you with inquiring minds see this link:

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...-s-Pizza-and-see-the-famous-Warchild-Hat-too-)

Humor accepted and btw...the HAT was retired and I'm working on breaking in a new one; with a different rep I hope. :uhoh:

I concur...All hail Venator...decide the issue for us great one... we hunger for your wise words.

I ran into a similar situation when working for a Va state agency that rented the building and grounds. The issue was if employees owed taxes on the value of the provided parking space. The court ruled that we did not, as the parking spaces were part of the property the agency rented and belonged to the landlord, not the agency.

I suggest that essentially the same applies to your situation, and that the parking spaces both on the main lot and those they are renting from BK* are not theirs to control. I'll also bet that the landlord (main lot and sub-leased BK spaces) did not include any firearms clause in their lease. You may or may not raise all sorts of red flags if you ask to see the building/grounds lease, but an attorney could probably protect your confidentiality as a client if you hired them to look into it.

stay safe.

*How much do you want to bet your employer is not renting spaces from BK but getting the landlord to handle it?

Just don't say anything.

"Don't ask, don't tell, don't hint"

If your employer is in the habit of randomly searching employee vehicles, it's time to find a new employer.

We all take risks and have to live with what we decide. Regardless of the legal aspects of this situation only you can decide what to do. I suggest you analysis the risk to you and your employment and the likelihood of being discovered with a gun in your car.

If it were me I would keep my gun secured in my vehicle in a locked case. If the employer did ask to search my car I would refuse (Unless it was a condition of employment and a terminating offense, and I would still refuse to open the locked safe and admit to nothing). I would say nothing about guns at work and take the risk. I feel the chance of a search of my vehicle would be very small, again depending on what I did for a living, i.e. some top secret stuff where searches are common.

But in the end you must decide.

Wow, good answer Brian..but... it's a politically neutral answer that uses common sense; a rare combination now days.

I guess he doesn't want to take sides Glock, but I don't disagree with your stance either. Just putting in my .02 worth.

WARCHILD said:

Wow, good answer Brian..but... it's a politically neutral answer that uses common sense; a rare combination now days.

I guess he doesn't want to take sides Glock, but I don't disagree with your stance either. Just putting in my .02 worth.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't ask for permission, better to beg forgiveness than ask for permission. Mums the word.

Venator said:

We all take risks and have to live with what we decide. Regardless of the legal aspects of this situation only you can decide what to do. I suggest you analysis the risk to you and your employment and the likelihood of being discovered with a gun in your car.

If it were me I would keep my gun secured in my vehicle in a locked case. If the employer did ask to search my car I would refuse (Unless it was a condition of employment and a terminating offense, and I would still refuse to open the locked safe and admit to nothing). I would say nothing about guns at work and take the risk. I feel the chance of a search of my vehicle would be very small, again depending on what I did for a living, i.e. some top secret stuff where searches are common.

But in the end you must decide.

Click to expand...

i agree 100%. michigan's castle doctrine extends to your vehicle. i would no more let my employer search my vehicle than i would let them search my house.

smellslikemichigan said:

i agree 100%. michigan's castle doctrine extends to your vehicle. i would no more let my employer search my vehicle than i would let them search my house.

Click to expand...

The 4th applies to governments only, employers can search you and your car, locker etc..as a condition of employment. If you refuse you could be fired.

Not sure a castle doctrine extends to your car in all things. If you mean self-defense then perhaps. Not so for firearms, otherwise you could keep a loaded firearm in your car without a license.