Help! Request for "guns at work" related lawsuits & info!

imported post

I know this is not specifically Open Carry related, but I really need some help, fast!

I work for a large multi-national company. Based in the US, we have 29 offices around the world, employing over 17,000 people. I work at a facility in Oregon.

The company-wide policy forbids posession of firearms anywhere on company property. Rumor is that one employee at my facility was fired a few years ago just because he had a shotgun locked in a visible gun rack in his pickup.

I contacted our Corporate Security & Safety department to request that the rule be changed.Iwant to be able to protect myself travellingto and from work, butbecause I oftenride a bicycle to work, I cannot do so without risk of being fired (security can search any bags, including fanny packs). I mentioned that policies alone cannot prevent anyone from carrying a firearm onto the property, and that by preventing law-abiding citizens frompossessing firearms, they are preventing employees from exercising protected rights of self defense going to and from work.

I am having a telephone conference with one of the heads of Facilities and someone from the Legal department tomorrow afternoon. I am hoping I can make a good case for at least allowing firearms in the parking lot or to be "checked in" at the security desks into lockers, but ultimately, I would like to convince them that as long as they're concealed, CHL holders can keep them on our person while we work.

I have Googled and Googled, and can't seem to find any lawsuits or very many cases that support my request. What I need help finding is this:

1. After any "workplace rampage shootings," has any of the victims sued the employer for NOT allowing handguns for self-defense at work, or for providing inadequate protection, in spite of a "no firearms" policy?

2. Has anyone ever sued an employer because of a no firearms policy that left them defenseless when attacked going to and from work?

3. I am pretty sure that none of the "workplace rampage shootings" have been caused by a Concealed Handgun License holder, and that some of them were even stopped by one, but can anyone point me to any proof of any individual cases?

If anyone has any other information, Google searches, or argumentsthat you think can assist me, it would be much appreciated.

...Thanks...
...Orygunner...

imported post

I read that one of the stipulations/terms in the Va. Tech lawsuit was that the university claimed no liability for the shooting. You probably need more, but this was off the top of my head, and the best I can do to help you get fast info...

imported post

Try a specialized search engine, findlaw.com for example.

imported post

How about Shirley Katz's case? It deals with public property, but in researching it you may find something useful with regards to Oregon.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/10/11/america/NA-GEN-US-Pistol-Packing-Teacher.php

imported post

I looked through the filings and arguments on Shirley Katz's case, and it seems not to apply. they are requesting the school employee policy be removed because it is in violation of ORS 166.160 (preemption) that says (basically) that no city, state, or other municipal corporation can restrict firearms in any way except the state legislature. They don't seem to touch on anything that could be of assistance to me in this instance.

I think this meeting is probably going to hinge on liability. Even if they agree, if the company feels they are going to be more liable if they allow firearms on company property, there is no argument i can throw at them that will matter. I want to find some information proving that if they follow my suggestion, liability will be reduced for them, but if they continue to ban firearms and something bad does happen, they'll be more liable for damages.

Virginia Tech settled out of court, but from what I can see, the lawsuits were based on the failure of the University to send out "Email alerts," and had nothing to do with banning firearms.

Who knows, maybe their policy is a result of insurance requirements, and this meeting has no possible positive outcome. i just want to go into this meeting prepared.

...Si vis pacem, para bellum...
...Orygunner...

imported post

Are there any cases of workplace violence where you work? Look into that; it might be one of your best routes. If there were can you argue that the company wasn't doing enough to ensure the safety of employees and you feel that you should be allowed to carry because of it?


http://www.braunconsulting.com/bcg/violence.html

According to one study by the Workplace Violence Research Institute, every workday, an estimated 16,400 threats are made, 723 workers are attacked, and 43,800 workers are harassed. Although rampage shootings make the headlines, a more common form of workplace violence is the "nonfatal" kind. This includes all behaviors, and circumstances that threaten an employee's physical safety, including verbal, sexual or physical assaults, threats, robberies, thefts, coercion, intimidation, stalking, and harassment.

Click to expand...

Also:

http://maysbusiness.tamu.edu/index.php/workplace-violence-and-employer-liability/

According to the article, FBI statistics show that nearly one million people are victim to some form of work-related violence each year. From a business perspective, the time lost from victim recovery can cost employers as much as $55 million per year. By examining the basics of legal theory, the researchers attempt to create a dialogue about workplace violence and ways that employers may lessen the amount of these acts that continue to occur daily. With more understanding, supervisors may see a drop in their own liability.

Click to expand...

The article that the quote is referring to is here:

http://jmi.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/16/4/362

But you have to pay or already be a subscriber to view the full article or the references, which would probably be valuable in finding the citation for the FBI statistic.

imported post

I'm guessing that if you argue for CC at work that you are going to be fighting a losing battle. From the employers standpoint, they are unlikely to be held legally responsible for someone barging in with a gun and shooting up the place, especially given that they have security in place which a BG is going to have to neutralize or circumvent to obtain access.

I think the better argument (yes on some things I am an incrementalist and on most things a pragmatist) is to argue for a firearm check in at the security gate. There is nothing in place now to stop someone to carry up TO the security checkpoint. Anyone could pull up to that checkpoint armed and use a firearm illegally. Allowing employees to carry up to that point and then check their firearm does not change the company liability in that regard at all nor does it pose any increased risk to any other employee or visitor.

You, and I'm sure others, carry a firearm when not at work for personal defense. If not for their employment rules you would carry to and from work for personal protection. If you do not carry to and from work and that 1% chance of you being the victim of a violent crime were to occur the company will certainly incur costs. You will hit the medical insurance hard which could have later repercussions in rates. You will have lost time at work which will cost the company money temporarily replacing you or shifting work loads while an employee short. You could conceivably receive injuries in such a scenario that would cause a disability they would be required to accommodate under the Disability Act which might be costly.

The State of Oregon has seen fit to issue you a concealed carry license/permit. The very fact that such licenses/permits are available indicates that the legislature finds them of value to society and individual citizens. You and other licensees have passed a criminal background check for felonies and misdemeanors and have proven proficiency with your sidearm to be so licensed. You earned your concealed license to protect yourself where legal and their policy denies you the ability to do so off company property on the way to and from work as you have no way to store the firearm prior to entering company property.

Lastly, you respect their private property rights to deny carry on company property. You only ask that they respect your right to carry the means of self-defense on the way to and from company property and accommodate that right with a means to secure your firearms in a mutually acceptable, safe manner prior to entering upon their private property.

Just my thoughts from a practical stand point rather than from a "rights" or idealistic standpoint.

imported post

Very well thought out.

imported post

*

imported post

Wow, deepdiver, thank you. I believe I am going to use much of what you said. Very well-thought out and stated.

...Orygunner...

imported post

I don't know if it will help you for your meeting, but I found commentary on the Salt Lake City mall shooting.
http://www.boblonsberry.com/writings.cfm?story=2088&go=4

I also found a picture of the sign listing the rules of the mall. "No weapons" is #10.
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/uploaded_images/HPIM0240-724381.jpg

imported post

Well, the phone conference went way worse than expected. :uhoh:

I thought I would have eveything well thought out and ready to have a rational discussion about my case. Barely got to discussion, and didn't even get to rational.

They asked me to start with my request, so I started off with my belief that the policy banning firearms without procedures to back it up does not make anyone at the facility safer, and that their policy makes it impossible to effectively protect myself going to and from work. I said that I respect the company's right to prohibit firearms, but that I would like to find some compromise that will allow me to bring myself-defense handgun to work, and at least leave it in my car, although having a "check in" or lockers at the security checkpoint would be ideal for me and others that ride bicycles.

Basically the Rep from Safety & Security started off saying he is a gun owner, and supports the 2nd Amendment. (Yeah, here it comes...) Then he stated that there is no way the company is going to change the policy, because the risk is too great for accidents. He handed me bull about negligent discharges are the #1 cause of firearms accidents, so allowing firearms on the property would be inviting accidents. :shock: I tried stating that CHL holders are the safest people in public and he said that the fact I have a CHL means nothing. He said most CHL holders are not properly trained or prepared to carry a firearm anyway. When I asked what he meant, he said he has friends that are police officers that have told him stories of most people that use a gun for self defense can't pull the trigger and end up getting killed or their gun taken away and used against them. :shock:When I told him I disagreed, he said I should make friends with some cops and talk to them to get the truth.

I knew at this point it was a lost cause. I'm just not a quick enough thinker with responses under stress to come up with rebuttals to total misinformed ignorant bulls%#*, but I don't think it would have done any good anyway.

He asked me if I feel unsafe, or have had any occurance of violence against me thatI feel like I need to carry a gun, and I said "Not yet, but why does that matter?" He said he feels the request is just academic rather than for any actual need.

He suggested if I really felt I needed to protect myself going to and from work, I should study Krav Maga self defense :uhoh:. He also went on about how they're not going to change their security checkpoints (currently we just have "cattle gates" with sensors for our badges), they already have security guards (unarmed) patrolling regularly, and they feel their security and policies are the best choice for company safety.

He ended the conversation by telling me if I ever feel unsafe going out to my vehicle, I can request one of the security guards escort me. :banghead: (I'm 5" taller and 50 lbs heavier than the average security guard here).

I guess I can just hope for a "guns at work" law here in Oregon to force my point, because I think my chances working directly with the company are slim to none. I was considering carrying anyway against company policy, butnow that I've made my name known, I'm afraid they might start singling me out for searches

...Baaaaaaaaa...
...Orygunner...


Edit for PS: Thanks everyone for your assistance. If anyone has any other suggestions, I may try attacking the issue again in the future .

imported post

It would appear that you undertook this endeavor in a less than fully prepared state. Perhaps you should fall back at this time until you have re-armed yourself with sufficient data to befuff any rebuttal they may dream up, and charge the fort again at a later date.

From what I've learned about battle tactics, You must first assemble an over whelming force. In this case, a devestating arsonal of statistical data and legalese. It's a good idea to enlist a well versed team as well. The last thing you want to have happen is to find yourself outnumbered in an engagment. The more guns you have prepared to fire salvos against your advesary, the better. It's a good idea to have other minds (fellow employees who are temperate and quick thinking) on your side tocover your flanks as well.

You might try circulating a petition of employee signatories (off company property of course), to present on the next battlefield.

imported post

Don't blame yourself. That guy had his mind made up before he ever picked up the phone and there was nothing you were going to say to convince him otherwise. AT least you now know who to call if you require misinformation or urban legends regarding gun ownership.

imported post

Dang.. Maybe you should request that they escort you to a place where you can pick up your properly stored firearm... (home) Also each morning call and request someone come and escort you all the way to work.

If they refuse, they aren't properly providing for your safety like they say they are.

imported post

I spied this thread a bit late to put in my .02 worth prior to your meeting, but would like to offer you a link that you may find useful. I hope this helps, should you have another opportunity to address the issue.

www.GunFacts.info

imported post

Good stuff deepdiver!You could even use a variation to question LE on their illegal stop.



The (state of) has seen fit to issue me a concealed carry license/permit. The very fact that such licenses/permits are available indicates that the legislature finds them of value to society and individual citizens. I’ve passed a criminal background checkS and have proven to be upstanding and proficient with my sidearm to be so licensed. I earned my concealed license to protect myself. Why must you violate me for which the legislature allows?

imported post

OK...for future use maybe?

Possibly the THREAT of a legal suit by yourFAMILY if you are hurt GOING to work, AT work or RETURNING home because you are unarmed due to their company policy will work.

I worked for Exxon Marketing in Baton Rouge until my retirement. There was a NO GUNS policy on their property and parking off site was NOT feasable. Guns were sneaked in at times, but Exxon got kinda hard core and brought dogs in to sniff out drugs AND guns. Wasn't worth the risk anymore.

I had many conversations about having weapons in my car, but they would not back down.

I then threatened to have my family sue and keep suing unless I could protect myself without danger of termination. They relented a little and procured a deal with the refinery security (down the street on Scenic Highway) that allowed us (marketing employees) to check our weapons at the main desk at the refinery.

All is well.....except I then threatened suit if I was hurt in the distance from marketing to the refinery. I retired before that was settled.

imported post

TheMrMitch wrote:

I worked for Exxon Marketing in Baton Rouge until my retirement. from marketing to the refinery. I retired before that was settled.

Click to expand...

How are you're Exxon stock options holding out? Did you cash in on Exxon’s profits?Will they get you through the next millennium?

Just kidding:celebrate Enjoy retirement.

imported post

jbone wrote:

TheMrMitch wrote:

I worked for Exxon Marketing in Baton Rouge until my retirement. from marketing to the refinery. I retired before that was settled.

Click to expand...

How are you're Exxon stock options holding out? Did you cash in on Exxon’s profits?Will they get you through the next millennium?

Just kidding:celebrate Enjoy retirement.

Click to expand...

Ahhhhhh......Had a divorce not squashed me flat from a stealing wife, I would be in the lap of luxury.:uhoh:Stocks had to go. BUT......she didn't get any either!:lol:

As it is, I do VERY well on my pension and SS. Am set the rest of my life. And I do get kidding every time Exxon makes a few more BILLION PROFIT!:dudeon't mind it at all!