State Law Versus Employee Policy

[Somemedic]

Just had a debate with my lieutenant on what's right and wrong.

He stated our fire commission law bans firearms from the premises. Not like the old guys used to bring their guns in to clean before/after a hunt... I digress....

I told him there was already case law where you could secure your gun in your car while on the job. He states the chief would fire and I could fight to get the job back.

State law makes it legal for my weapon to remain in my car, period. State law superceedes company policy or commission law as it were. The fire chief and commission would not have a basis to fire me. My line of reasoning is correct?

 

[RobertaX]

Yes....but... They could still fire you. You'd have to sue. OTOH, unless they are doing car inspections, a firearm out of sight in your car is a non-problem. Don't tell, avoid being asked. (Are you carrying it to make a point, for convenience or for protection? Only the first requires discussion.)

There are some exemptions in the law. They may include public safety agencies. Look it up and make sure!

As far as I know, state law requires you have a LTCH to take advantage of this, BTW. No permit, no gun locked in your car.

 

[rockhopper46038]

What Robert said. You cannot be fired for having a firearm locked and secure in your car in the parking lot. You CAN be fired for myriad reasons ostensibly having nothing to do with the above, because you have decided to make your employer aware of a law that prohibits them from interjecting their personal opinion into a discussion of legality. If you have pro bono representation through the union, it might be worth it to be a test, but the unions don't seem to be particularly gun friendly, so you may get left high and dry.

 

[Somemedic]

It actually all started when the LT said something about "that dumb ass who took his gun in to vote..." and the debate was on. I never eluded to if there were guns in my car or not, he said it was a fireable offense to which I corrected him, saying it used to be but was no longer the case.

 

[Faine]

What Robert said. You cannot be fired for having a firearm locked and secure in your car in the parking lot. You CAN be fired for myriad reasons ostensibly having nothing to do with the above, because you have decided to make your employer aware of a law that prohibits them from interjecting their personal opinion into a discussion of legality. If you have pro bono representation through the union, it might be worth it to be a test, but the unions don't seem to be particularly gun friendly, so you may get left high and dry.

Incorrect. You CAN be fired for having a firearm in your car, locked or not. In the state of Indiana an employer may terminate an employee for ANY reason. If the termination violates labor laws (local, state, or federal) the employee may be able to receive compensation for the termination or even get their job back. HOWEVER, if it does not violate LABOR laws, and the law concerning carrying a firearm in your motor vehicle is not a labor law, there would be no recompense short of filing for unemployment and winning because of wrongful termination. (note: Eli Lilly has an exemption from this and its employees are not permitted to carry even in their automobiles, many companies applied to be exempted from this but only Eli Lilly was successful at the time, to my knowledge no company has been added to this list.)

(also also wik: I come here to learn about gun laws and how you handle myself concerning firearms, if you want to know labor laws go to the DoL website. I won't go through the ins and outs of labor law here, I have many years of experience with Indiana and federal labor laws, but I will tell you that Indiana is very pro-corporation unless there is a clear case of wrongful termination.)

 

[Somemedic]

Indiana Code 34-28-7

Governor Daniels Signs Workplace Gun Bill Into Law | Ogletree Deakins

Seems to me, if I read this correctly, that any such policy is a violation of IC 34-28-7

 

[rockhopper46038]

Yes, Somedic, I agree. However Faine is correct when he states that an employer in Indiana (an "at will" State) can fire an employee for any reason, or no reason at all, at any time. You could be fired for wearing yellow socks, if an employer wished to. But there well could be consequences to the employer. I assume Faine took exception semantically with my use of the word "can't". I shouldn't tell you you "can't" rob a bank...I should tell you it is against the law. If a non-exempt employer were so obtuse as to actually indicate that the reason an employee was being fired was because they possessed a secured, locked away, out of sight firearm in their personal vehicle in the parking lot, an employee could bring civil suit against that employer, and almost certainly win, under the IC code you listed. Damages could exceed just being awarded unemployment benefits by quite some bit, as the Code lists "actual" damages can be awarded in addition to court and representation fees.

 

[RobertaX]

Still, it is Your License To Sue, so I would advise discretion. The best discussion about that gun legally locked in you car is the one you never have to have.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

The best discussion about that gun legally locked in you car is the one you never have to have.

This^^^^. Sounds like you haven't done this yet, but it's worth a friendly reminder. Also, agree with Faine...they can fire you for anything and they if they're smart, they'll never tell you why.

 

[Somemedic]

We are under civil service law... theres only 7 issues we can be fired for per commission rules, or thats the idea.

 

[Whosyer]

I'm not sure about Corporate, or the Research Labs, but Lilly manufacturing sites are exempt due to Department of Homeland Security. I believe there are quite a few manufacturing facilities that store or produce hazardous materials, that are also exempt. Certain harbors/ shipyards as well.

 

[Judy]

I work for the state of Indiana in a prison and we are not allowed to have weapons in our vehicles.

 

[Captain Bligh]

... (note: Eli Lilly has an exemption from this and its employees are not permitted to carry even in their automobiles, many companies applied to be exempted from this but only Eli Lilly was successful at the time, to my knowledge no company has been added to this list.)...

Do you have a source citation for this information? My understanding of the law is that specific types of employers are made exempt by the law. I recall no reference for those employers having to "apply" for an exemption or a "list" of approved exempted facilities.