What's your companies policy for carrying at the office??

[Hmac]

Probably would have been shorter to ask "Does anyone's place of work ALLOW employees to carry?" Mine doesn't and as soon as the law changed on carry they were very prompt in making clear in no uncertain terms that guns were not allowed in the building or in the parking lot (including vehicles) . They also put up a sign immediately. I simply replied to the head of HR that they couldn't preclude someone from carrying in the parking lot or having a gun in their car per state law. Normally I wouldn't have done this off the cuff as I prefer to fly below the radar whenever possible but I've already been known for pointing it out when management oversteps it's bounds legally. They had a rash of thefts a while back (food from the employee fridge of all things) and made some silly statement about searching people AND their cars if necessary. I had to point out where they actually stood legally on that one as well. I didn't bother however to point out that their "no guns" sign was improper in wording, font size and placement (height).

While it may be illegal for them to prohibit firearms in your car, it's worth noting that by state law they can fire you for any reason, or no reason at all. As a result, the law on keeping a gun in your car in the parking lot or the wording of their "no guns" sign is totally irrelevant as to whether or not you get to keep your job. If they find a gun in your car, quoting the law to them doesn't necessarily afford you any protection nor have any bearing on whether or not you get fired.

And, as has been pointed out here several times before, the actual wording/font/placement of "no gun" signs is also totally irrelevant since the signs don't have the force of law anyway.

[Mn01r6]

+1 on what HMAC said. Here is what a large MPLS law firm had for advice to companies following the 2003 MCPPA enactment:

Must we tolerate guns in the parking lot?
This is the hot topic of the hour. The gun permit is essentially a defense to a criminal charge of
illegal possession of firearms. Rules incident to defining the scope of the permit quite arguably
simply modify that criminal defense. They have no clear bearing on the entirely civil matters of how
employers manage their work environment and how owners of private property grant access to
their property. Indeed, this new law expressly recognizes employer prerogatives to manage their
businesses. With respect to employees, employers would seem at liberty to take, or stick to, the
position that possessing guns at work, even in the parking area, will not be tolerated, on penalty of
discipline or discharge (subject to the potential duty to bargain mentioned earlier). Employees
employed at will remain so employed, and are subject to termination of employment for any reason
not legally prohibited. The flat mandatory provision in the statute stating that owners of private
establishments “may not prohibit” guns in parking areas will be argued to bar such disciplinary
action, but that provision quite arguably should be read in the context of the entire bill. In any
event, it does not create a cause of action which an employee could easily use to sue for wrongful
discharge. Prospectively, consideration might be warranted to inserting into the standard
employment application the applicant’s promise that if employed, he or she agrees not to possess
any firearm or weapon anywhere at work, including in the parking area, or at any time while at work.
The greater concern relative to the parking lot or ramp is with respect to non-employee guests.
Again, the owner presumably remains in control of the premises, but the intent of the statute does
seem to be to circumscribe the owner’s rights to bar guns. The measure of incorporating into
vendor and customer contracts a provision precluding guns in the parking area could address some
concern moving forward. Advice could be provided that anyone possessing firearms in the lot will
not be viewed with favor in future dealings. But for immediate purposes, it would seem that it will
be difficult to assure that parking areas are fully gun-free.

[Ron Burgundy]

So, in summary, your employer can still tell you to GTFO for any reason at anytime.

While I spend more of my time at work than not at work, I'm OK being unarmed at work. God forbid something terrible happens and I take a hot one through the lung, my family should be taken care of. Life insurance plus our litigious society means my kids' kids probably wouldn't need to work after receiving the settlement. Couple that with the statistical odds of this happening at work and I'm OK not carrying. Seems to me to be a better trade off than carrying (concealed is concealed, etc) and risking termination. Of course, I expect dissenting opinions.

[PHATSPEED7x]

I had a sheriff come see me at work for a part for a squad car today at my dealership. He was in casual clothes with his Badge on his belt, open carrying his service pistol (Glock 22), spare mag, and handcuffs. Well apparently after I was done helping him he walked through the showroom. The new general manager stopped him and confronted him about the "open carry". After realizing he was law enforcement he felt like an idiot, but I can see how this might cause future conflicts at work. Both me and my boss work with empty holsters on our belt in plan view. Haven't been asked yet to not wear them.

[farmerj]

I asked my boss about it again tonight....


he told me to GTFO and go wash the truck.......

Then I seen him fiddling with the 5.56 ammo he bought today.......

Started babbling something about if I was working harder, he'd be able to go buy more ammo....

[Rodentman]

I learned from my permit renewal class yesterday that the employer CAN legally ban employees from having a firearm in their vehicle, and they DO have the right to search your person and property whilst on their premises.

Therefore I will no longer carry whilst commuting. If something happens on 494 on the way home, I'll deal with it unarmed.

[farmerj]

I learned from my permit renewal class yesterday that the employer CAN legally ban employees from having a firearm in their vehicle, and they DO have the right to search your person and property whilst on their premises.

Therefore I will no longer carry whilst commuting. If something happens on 494 on the way home, I'll deal with it unarmed.

Care to share further on that...

[Rodentman]

I took my renewal class at BPR yesterday and specifically asked the question if an employer can ban employees from possessing a firearm in their vehicle in their parking lot. They told me that they could not ban non-employees from so doing, but as part of the terms of employment they can legally ban employees from so doing. And they CAN search your person, property, and vehicle whilst on company property including their parking lot.

They DID have a dog come and sniff eneryone's office a few months ago, BTW with no announcement nor statement of what the dog was trained to detect.

I can't cite you the specific law, but this is what I was told.

BUT I found THIS in the law:

Subd. 18.Employers; public colleges and universities.(a) An employer, whether public or private, may establish policies that restrict the carry or possession of firearms by its employees while acting in the course and scope of employment. Employment related civil sanctions may be invoked for a violation.

(b) A public postsecondary institution regulated under chapter 136F or 137 may establish policies that restrict the carry or possession of firearms by its students while on the institution's property. Academic sanctions may be invoked for a violation.

(c) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and (b), an employer or a postsecondary institution may not prohibit the lawful carry or possession of firearms in a parking facility or parking area.

And on another site:

Minimizing Risk

Concerned employers and business establishments can help reduce risk by taking a few simple steps:

Amend employee handbooks to include a policy banning employees from carrying guns on work premises (excluding parking lots) and off-site while performing tasks on behalf of the employer relating to the employee's job duties. The policy should specifically reserve the employer's right to inspect employee workstations, purses, and briefcases on premises, and state that an employee's failure to comply with such policy may result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment. Employees should be required to sign an acknowledgment stating that they received a copy of the employer's policy, understand it, and agree to abide by such policy.
While it appears that an employee policy banning guns on work premises may not cover temporary employees and independent contractors, employers should be able to modify their contracts with temporary placement agencies and independent contractors to add language restricting guns on work premises.
Institute a "premises ban" by posting signs at each entrance to notify the public of the gun ban on their premises. In addition, the operator of the business establishment will need to personally inform each person of the gun ban either verbally or in writing (for example, by giving each visitor a post-card notifying him or her of the gun ban, or providing a "guest book" for visitors to sign containing the gun ban notice).

While taking all of the above measures does not eradicate all risks associated with guns in the workplace and on business premises, it minimizes an employer or business owner's exposure to gun-related incidents and thereby reduces at lease some of the risk of gun-related liability for Minnesota businesses.

[xd ED]

The short answer is:

At-will employment.

[farmerj]

I took my renewal class at BPR yesterday and specifically asked the question if an employer can ban employees from possessing a firearm in their vehicle in their parking lot. They told me that they could not ban non-employees from so doing, but as part of the terms of employment they can legally ban employees from so doing. And they CAN search your person, property, and vehicle whilst on company property including their parking lot.

They DID have a dog come and sniff eneryone's office a few months ago, BTW with no announcement nor statement of what the dog was trained to detect.

I can't cite you the specific law, but this is what I was told.

BUT I found THIS in the law:

Subd. 18.Employers; public colleges and universities.(a) An employer, whether public or private, may establish policies that restrict the carry or possession of firearms by its employees while acting in the course and scope of employment. Employment related civil sanctions may be invoked for a violation.

(b) A public postsecondary institution regulated under chapter 136F or 137 may establish policies that restrict the carry or possession of firearms by its students while on the institution's property. Academic sanctions may be invoked for a violation.

(c) Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and (b), an employer or a postsecondary institution may not prohibit the lawful carry or possession of firearms in a parking facility or parking area.

And on another site:

Minimizing Risk

Concerned employers and business establishments can help reduce risk by taking a few simple steps:

Amend employee handbooks to include a policy banning employees from carrying guns on work premises (excluding parking lots) and off-site while performing tasks on behalf of the employer relating to the employee's job duties. The policy should specifically reserve the employer's right to inspect employee workstations, purses, and briefcases on premises, and state that an employee's failure to comply with such policy may result in disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment. Employees should be required to sign an acknowledgment stating that they received a copy of the employer's policy, understand it, and agree to abide by such policy.
While it appears that an employee policy banning guns on work premises may not cover temporary employees and independent contractors, employers should be able to modify their contracts with temporary placement agencies and independent contractors to add language restricting guns on work premises.
Institute a "premises ban" by posting signs at each entrance to notify the public of the gun ban on their premises. In addition, the operator of the business establishment will need to personally inform each person of the gun ban either verbally or in writing (for example, by giving each visitor a post-card notifying him or her of the gun ban, or providing a "guest book" for visitors to sign containing the gun ban notice).

While taking all of the above measures does not eradicate all risks associated with guns in the workplace and on business premises, it minimizes an employer or business owner's exposure to gun-related incidents and thereby reduces at lease some of the risk of gun-related liability for Minnesota businesses.

Um....ok....

I'll call something is rotten in Denmark with that course on that issue, but I'll leave it at that. It seems to be the one topic that can and often has been beaten to death here in the past. Even in the law that you posted, it contradicts what you were told.

Me personally, I would never let my employer into my vehicle. jeez, I even lock my semi and don't allow the gate guards into it entering a military post. But having a retired military ID helps my situation there.

[CraigJS]

I work hourly, not contracted or salaried. When I punch out, they don't own me. My vehicle while on company land is in an uncontrolled lot that would be open to other persons parking if they wanted to do so. No vehicle IDs used. I go through a carded turnstile (attendance and time recorded). They have a "legal" posting at the gates. Also a sign, person and vehicle are subject to search blah blah etc. Again at gate and surrounding fence. (controlled area) I WILL NOT allow a vehicle search ( in the lot), I keep anything "banned" out of sight or in the trunk. If this isn't enough, let them ban me. At 62 I'm 2" from retirement and this will aid in me making the choice. My retirement isn't tied to said company so they can't block anything.. Their security is unarmed, wear class II vests, carry radios, dress all tactical black. Feel good security only.
That said, yes they can ban/fire you for any or no reason. Only one person has been "let go" with this policy and he left an empty shotgun case in plain view with ammo in view. A rover security "professional" saw it, reported it. Employee gone, cops called, ex employee opened car door. His bad...

xd ED, you are correct!

[farmerj]

yes, xdEd is correct.

At-will employment though is entirely different topic than being able to ban.

The legality of banning someone over even an empty gun case is stretched at best. I've known guys who use shotgun cases for levels. I know others who use gun cases for arrows as well.

[Rodentman]

I may call a lawyer to see if there's a defined answer (yes or no) as to whether an employer can ban employees from have a firearm in a locked vehicle in the parking lot. I agree the vies seem contradictory.

I admit I don't consider my commute on 35E and 494 to be a high risk area, and I rarely stop anywhere on the way. Still, I want to know what my rights are.

[ktech]

I may call a lawyer to see if there's a defined answer (yes or no) as to whether an employer can ban employees from have a firearm in a locked vehicle in the parking lot. I agree the vies seem contradictory.

I admit I don't consider my commute on 35E and 494 to be a high risk area, and I rarely stop anywhere on the way. Still, I want to know what my rights are.

The short answer (as mentioned above) is that you don't have any right to be employed - MN is an at-will employment state, so your employer may dismiss you for any reason not expressly prohibited by other laws (race, age, gender, etc).

[Hmac]

As an hourly employee, at-will employment applies. Your employer may not be able to legally keep you from keeping your gun in your car in the lot nor may they legally be able to search your vehicle, but if he comes to you one day and says, "can we search your car" and you say "no", he can say " you're fired then".

The law on firearms is irrelevant relative to your job security.