legal question

[OULobo]

This one's for any lawyers out there.

My company just handed out a copy of the weapons policy for everyone to sign. I know this is just a backlash from the CCW permits taking effect this coming month, but the question involves the rights of the company vs. employee. In the policy it says they reserve the right to search the person and property of any employee, including vehicles, that is on property of the company. My question is, is it legal for the company to search my vehicle without my consent? I know that they can fire me or have it towed if I refuse to allow the vehicle to be searched, but if I am present, asked and I refuse do they have the right to do it anyway and do they have the right to do it without ever telling me? It seems to me that this is could be tresspassing, violation of privacy or unrightful search/seizure. Second question; If they find a weapon, who decides if that is a weapon or a tool (ball bats, machetes, sledge hammers, 2x4s, ect.) and if I voluntarily leave with the weapon can they still press charges, as they claim? If so, what is the charge?

 

[Tgace]

You run into some sticky legal issues when it comes to stuff like this. As an LEO there is no way I could get away with something like this, but a business probably has some sort of legal agreement drawn up with the employees (an "if you want to work here, this is the way it is" type thing), even then, if they search you/your property after you refuse it I would say its an illegal search and they are opening themselves up to some major civil suits. If you are really concerned try dropping an e-mail to the ACLU and see what they say.

 

[OULobo]

Thanks Tgrace. I was hoping you and any of the other LEOs would chime in on this.

 

[Tgace]

Your profile says your from Ohio so...

http://www.acluohio.org/

 

[Ceicei]

If you haven't already, you might want to do a post search over at http://www.packing.org and see how others with CCW permits handled similar issues with workplace searches. Of course, State laws vary. You might even want to post your question there too as there are others grappling with the new Ohio laws on CCW permits.

-Ceicei

 

[Rich Parsons]

The company I work for has a weapon policy as well. No weapons on grounds or property. They define weapons as firearms and bladed weapons or impact weapons such as clubs excluding baseball/softball bats. No signed agreements, yet it is implied with the salaried agreement to follow company policies.

Just because others do it, does not mean it is right. The policy has been in place for years, mostly because of a few shootings at plants. Therefore a corporate wide policy even for engineers and office staff.

 

[rmcrobertson]

It's private property, dude. And it belongs to them. They have every right to ban obviously-unsafe practices, and in fact their lawyers have probably demanded it.

 

[jkn75]

IMO, the company can do what they want. You are going onto private property and you subject yourself to their rules. If you are troubled by this and are able to, park your car off of their property and then you will only have to worry about the police.

IMO, a weapon will either be defined in the agreement or it will be what a reasonable person would think a weapon is. A car can be considered a weapon in the right circumstances so it will depend.

My question is, is it legal for the company to search my vehicle without my consent? I know that they can fire me or have it towed if I refuse to allow the vehicle to be searched, but if I am present, asked and I refuse do they have the right to do it anyway and do they have the right to do it without ever telling me? It seems to me that this is could be tresspassing, violation of privacy or unrightful search/seizure.

IMO, they are a private entity. They do not have the right to search your vehicle. As you said they can fire you or tow the vehicle but that's it.

They are not the government. The government only has the right to search your vehicle in certain, defined manners.

Finally, the Constitution only protects citizens from government action. Therefore what they are doing is not search and seizure, in a constitutional sense, because they are not the government or acting under the color of government.

 

[Touch Of Death]

The company I work for has a weapon policy as well. No weapons on grounds or property. They define weapons as firearms and bladed weapons or impact weapons such as clubs excluding baseball/softball bats. No signed agreements, yet it is implied with the salaried agreement to follow company policies.

Just because others do it, does not mean it is right. The policy has been in place for years, mostly because of a few shootings at plants. Therefore a corporate wide policy even for engineers and office staff.

I think every one should just carry a crocett set with them where ever they go. You got your hammers, sharp pointy things, and large heavy balls that fit in that pillow case everyone should carry. :uhyeah:
Sean

 

[Rich Parsons]

I think every one should just carry a crocett set with them where ever they go. You got your hammers, sharp pointy things, and large heavy balls that fit in that pillow case everyone should carry. :uhyeah:
Sean

I actually made a mistake and had my training bag with me, and I had to drive through a sercurity check to get out. They searched the bag and wanted to take my rattan canes and other training toys. I asked for a receipt and also if they wanted the tire iron and they had better take the golf clubs from the guy over there. This guy just happened to be a senior unclassfied director. A senior security guard asked why I had the equipment. Note he did not say weapons. I told him I used the equipment and tools in training for self defense. He said have a nice day. I left. All was fine. Yes they could have taken it. Yes I cuold have been in lots of trouble and had lots of paperwork to do. Yet they also knew I would raise a huge stink about discrimination and the big boys get to have their toys and the workers cannot.

Just be smart. Do not piss off the guards and all will be fine. Keep your toys in your trunk and do not bring them out while at work.

 

[Chicago Green Dragon]

I think it depends on the municipality and the laws that govern that area. Like here in chicago you can not own a handgun. The city does not allow you to register it unless you are a LEO or someone with a license for their business or certain public officials.
So when they catch you with it, you are charged with possesion of an unregistered weapon. It is a city ordinance but federally you can buy it outside in the burbs. You bring it into the city limits and they can jam you up with it. As for the company dictating its policy. I would recommend getting in touch with a lawyer in your area to see how the law applies since it can vary from one place to another. There are some states which do not allow off duty outside law enforement officers to carry and they will proc. people who do.

Chicago Green Dragon

:asian:

 

[Tgace]

I think the issue here isnt so much the companies "right" to search persons/vehicles coming onto their property as it is the question of if they can search you/your vehicle by force if you refuse (right?). Not allowing weapons on business property is common. Subjecting employees to body searches less so. IMPO (in my professional opinion) the company would have the right to take job action on you if you refuse to be searched, break company policy and/or they could demand that you leave the property unless you submit to the search. If they search you, break into your car etc. without consent, they could be subject to the law...they arent the government... as somebody has posted before.

 

[OULobo]

I'm going to try to answer as many posts as I can in one.


Ceicei
"If you haven't already, you might want to do a post search over at http://www.packing.org and see how others with CCW permits handled similar issues with workplace searches. Of course, State laws vary. You might even want to post your question there too as there are others grappling with the new Ohio laws on CCW permits."

The CCW laws for OH go into effect this coming month, so the laws have yet to really be hashed out. I will see if anyone on packing.com has any ideas. Thanks.




Rich Parsons
"Just because others do it, does not mean it is right. The policy has been in place for years, mostly because of a few shootings at plants. Therefore a corporate wide policy even for engineers and office staff. Just be smart. Do not piss off the guards and all will be fine. Keep your toys in your trunk and do not bring them out while at work."

Same situation. The policy has been around for years, but with the new CCW coming into effect, managment has decided to state the policy over again. I personally don't think I would bring a firearm to work so its a bit of a non-issue, but resent the company telling me they "reserve the right to search my vehicle without concent or notification."



rmcrobertson
"It's private property, dude. And it belongs to them. They have every right to ban obviously-unsafe practices, and in fact their lawyers have probably demanded it."

Technically, my car is private property too, so they have no right to violate that boundry. I'm not arguing they have the right to ban weapons, just that they don't have the right to search me or my property without consent or notification.



Chicago Green Dragon
"I think it depends on the municipality and the laws that govern that area. Like here in chicago you can not own a handgun. The city does not allow you to register it unless you are a LEO or someone with a license for their business or certain public officials.
So when they catch you with it, you are charged with possesion of an unregistered weapon. It is a city ordinance but federally you can buy it outside in the burbs. You bring it into the city limits and they can jam you up with it. As for the company dictating its policy. I would recommend getting in touch with a lawyer in your area to see how the law applies since it can vary from one place to another. There are some states which do not allow off duty outside law enforement officers to carry and they will proc. people who do."

The law does allow me to carry with a CCW and it does allow them to ban guns from the property, but again, I'm bringing up the search issue.




Tgace
"I think the issue here isnt so much the companies "right" to search persons/vehicles coming onto their property as it is the question of if they can search you/your vehicle by force if you refuse (right?). Not allowing weapons on business property is common. Subjecting employees to body searches less so. IMPO (in my professional opinion) the company would have the right to take job action on you if you refuse to be searched, break company policy and/or they could demand that you leave the property unless you submit to the search. If they search you, break into your car etc. without consent, they could be subject to the law...they arent the government... as somebody has posted before. "

That's it dead on. I don't have a problem with them banning the guns and I can abide by that, but I don't like the idea that they think they have the right to search my property or person without my consent or notification. Just like you mentioned, I can accept job related sanctions or moving the vehicle/leaving the property, but that is the choice I should be given. I'm sure if I decided to tell them no, they would fine me or fire me, but I don't think they could stop me from stopping them from breaking into my car or physically trying to search me. It would be interesting to see them try.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Sorry, but it is very much an issue of private property and workplace safety. They have every right to demand that you do NOT bring weapons into the workplace, and--for the same reasons that companies can drug test--they have every right to search. it's their property. Period.

And the cops already have, and have always had, the legal right to search selected areas of your car during traffic stops.

I might also note that if people weren't gun-mad, the problem would never arise.

 

[Tgace]

I dunno, if you were a civilian security guard that forced an employee into being searched or "broke into" his vehicle, you may just get arrested. Private property dosent void penal law property/person offenses. It would all depend on the circumstances though. And again, the issue isnt about weapons, its about a business thinking they can FORCIBLY search an employees person/property.

 

[Chicago Green Dragon]

Like I said before questions about search or seizure should be answered by a lawyer that practices in that municipality since different departments and municipalities have different ordinances that can be enacted.

Chicago Green Dragon

:asian:

 

[OULobo]

Sorry, but it is very much an issue of private property and workplace safety. They have every right to demand that you do NOT bring weapons into the workplace, and--for the same reasons that companies can drug test--they have every right to search. it's their property. Period.

And the cops already have, and have always had, the legal right to search selected areas of your car during traffic stops.

I might also note that if people weren't gun-mad, the problem would never arise.

As Tgrace stated, private property doesn't allow for assault and there is no work place safety issue if you ask them to leave or move their car and they comply. If you use the issue of drug testing, then I can still refuse to take the test. Given, I will have to face sanctions by my employer, but I still don't have to take the test if I choose not to. Why is search any different. My car is not their property, no matter where it is. It is my property. If they see a problem in my car and wish to eliminate the problem, then they can have it towed and impounded at the owner's expense, but again they can't forcibly enter it, as that could be damaging or tresspassing on my property ie the car.

Consequently, officers have to have probable cause before they can search any part of your vehicle.

It's not just a weapons issue, its an issue of personal rights. I may not want to be touched by a security guard. If I don't want to be touched I have the right to leave without being touched, whether they want to search me or not.

Another thing to bring up, is that about two weeks ago, while I was attending the Communtiy Police Academy, one of the officers mentioned that a local office building was putting up signs that notified of a no weapons on the premises policy. The officer said that the only time the police could step in was if someone got caught (someone in the building noticed that a person was wearing a weapon). He mentioned that the only real search methods that were allowed were passive systems like metal detectors or X-Ray. This sounds like is lends itsself somewhat to what we are discussing now.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Again, there's a difference between government property and private property. And, as far as I know, companies that have a drug test policy may not force you to be tested--they are within their present rights, however, to a) refuse to hire you, b) dismiss you, if you refuse such testing.

More to the point, the chances seem to be that if you insist upon carrying weapons to work, YOU are the threat to everybody at work. Which is exactly why companies ban weapons.

I don't see what the big deal is, anyway. The chances are vanishingly small that you're going to need one of the damn things at work anyway--and even smaller that they're going to help you if you do. There are a lot simpler, and safer, and more-reliable, ways to protect yourself and the company anyway.

It's also worth considering taking this as a moral issue--perhaps you should consider refusing to contribute to the increasingly-threatening and prone-to-violence quality of American society.

 

[loki09789]

I dunno, if you were a civilian security guard that forced an employee into being searched or "broke into" his vehicle, you may just get arrested. Private property dosent void penal law property/person offenses. It would all depend on the circumstances though. And again, the issue isnt about weapons, its about a business thinking they can FORCIBLY search an employees person/property.

That is the way I understand it as well. Before I got in to teaching, I worked as a security guard/supervisor and was a security coordinator (fancy name for the guy who works for the company that is contracting the security services). The security guard or any company rep could only act as any civilian making a citizens arrest if you were suspected of wrong doing and intend on detaining you let alone plan on pushing a search. They better have the cops on the way and an eye witness who saw the weapon/incident and can link it to your vehicle to justify any kind of searching by the LEO who arrive on the scene.

Anything less substantial can lead to you winning a civil case and possibly suing the company.

 

[Rich Parsons]

That is the way I understand it as well. Before I got in to teaching, I worked as a security guard/supervisor and was a security coordinator (fancy name for the guy who works for the company that is contracting the security services). The security guard or any company rep could only act as any civilian making a citizens arrest if you were suspected of wrong doing and intend on detaining you let alone plan on pushing a search. They better have the cops on the way and an eye witness who saw the weapon/incident and can link it to your vehicle to justify any kind of searching by the LEO who arrive on the scene.

Anything less substantial can lead to you winning a civil case and possibly suing the company.

In Michigan, technically the securiy guard cannot detain you. If they do it can be viweed as kidnapping. Yet, in real big cases, they almost always have an officer on hand.