Well good luck to the man and i hope he wins big
"Under the guise of “zero tolerance”, gun hating private community Lakes of the Four Seasons (LOFS) has fired a seasonal landscaping employee of 21 years because he was a gun owner. And no, I don’t mean that he was carrying a gun while working, nor did he have a gun in his car on LOFS property.
"Thanks to the forward thinking of the State of Indiana, not only is the LOFS actions immoral and unethical but they are also ILLEGAL.
"It is that last part that has brought on the lawsuit by Ferlaino against the Property Owners Association. According to Ferlaino’s attorney, Marissa McDermott:
The association violated Indiana’s “take your gun to work law,” which was amended in 2011, because it required Ferlaino to divulge information about owing a gun and fired him because he’s a gun owner."Also, even if Ferlaino had brought his gun to work and left it secured in his car, the law forbids employers from punishing employees who exercise that option.
"Not only is Ferlaino is seeking actual and punitive damages, attorney fees etc. he’s also asking a judge to order the property owners association to refrain from engaging in similar practices with regard to other employees.
You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC
Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.
Well good luck to the man and i hope he wins big
Luke 22:36 ; 36Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
"guns are like a Parachute, if you don't have one when you need it, you will not need one again"
i you call a CHP a CCW then you are really stupid. period.
I don't think he will win. Public exceptions to the at will doctrine of employee terminations have never, nowhere, included such an exception to the at-will employee rule.
If you can recall, in CT, in the permit application and subsequent Board of Firearm Permit Examiners' (the admin agency hearing permit denial appeals/BFPE) I objected to the requirement of disclosing an applicants employer information just because that an employer CAN fire an employee just for owning guns.
The BFPE agreed with me when I refused to place this information down on their questionnaire response (other members here have also followed my lead w/o having their appeal dismissed); however, they still claimed that I did not complete the permit form filed with police and denied the appeal solely because of an "incomplete application". So I still have work to do there ... the full board refused to accept the secretary of the board's decision on their questionnaire requirements and to apply the reasoning to the permit application itself. In fact, during my hearing they refused to accept or even acknowledge that the secretary of the board even made such a decision regarding their own questionnaire even when shown that this occurred. It made for a contentious hearing.
Gun owners should never tell their employers that they own guns; even if current management is OK with it, management can change overnight. As a manager, I always advise people talking over lunch or just in normal conversations to insure that their discussion of guns cannot be overheard by other employees or managers as some are anti-gun and will cry about you being a gun owner. They should treat their conversations as top secret.
Last edited by davidmcbeth; 10-12-2014 at 02:18 AM.
Do I agree with an employer should have the ability to fire you simply because you own a gun? Nope.
But I'm just highlighting what the law IS, not what I desire it to be.
The employer does not have to show that you have been (or even has any question) involved in criminal activities.
Oh, you own a gun? You're fired ! Perfectly OK in today's world.
Don't like that? Get an employment contract signed between you and your employer (hint: employee manuals generally don't count in every state I have looked at unless their provisions are incorporated into an actual written contract).
There are exceptions to the at-will aspect of employment (like complaining to OSHA and the like) but I have never seen a state that has this exception for gun ownership. We are free to lobby the legislature for one .. courts abhor expanding the exceptions.
Last edited by davidmcbeth; 10-12-2014 at 05:05 AM.
If TRUMP 2016 loses then I will shrug off my WHITE MAN'S BURDEN and leave the world to the Dindus and Done Nuffins. Read and understand Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged as a prescription for the future. TRUMP 2016
Good thing the guy wasn't a muslim and they didn't ask him if he owned or had access to any sharp knives.
“Men live without other security than what their own strength and their own invention shall furnish them"
-Thomas Hobbes 1651
Indiana is not an at will employment state. It is a right to work state
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
'At Will' simply means that employers do not need a reason to release someone.
'Right to Work' simply means the same thing, but workers can also not be required to join a union to remain employed where a CBA is in place.
I am an 'at will employee,' in a 'right to work' state.
Last edited by wrightme; 10-13-2014 at 08:25 PM.
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
"Ferlaino's conversation with his co-workers violated the company's "no tolerance policy,"
It would appear that he was not fired for owning a firearm, but for discussing firearms at work. Apparently it is against their policy.
Originally Posted by Primus
I had that same question about the conversation policy. Efforts to reach out to their management have gone unanswered at the time of this post.
"I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump
We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand
NO, he can win this case IF he can prove they fired him because his gun ownership, like a letter of termination explaining why (which they don't legally have to give in this state actually, but they might have screwed up and did so anyway).
And you can't be fired for ANY reason. In some cases, while under contract, when receiving certain benefits like a pension, or for civil rights reasons (race, color, creed, religion, etc.)
Also, you need to remember that it is easier to prove a case in civil than it is in criminal court, because its burden of evidence (which he might have) versus "beyond a reasonable doubt."
The limiting factor is generally court costs, unless you have a lawyer contracted on a contingency basis that you win.
But yes, it CAN be difficult to sue in an "at will" state, if they give you no reason for termination.