How far can A employer go when searching you?? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : How far can A employer go when searching you??


bug
12-12-2011, 19:10
New policy where I work:

It says they reserve the right to search lockers,bags(if on company property that's fine I understand this rule I don't like it but whatever) but here is the part where I start to have a real problem they say they can search you. and open and search your vehicle.

A little background I am in Ohio and I work at a place that supplies roofing both commercial/residential so honestly there really is nothing to steal that would not be really obvious.

So I am at a loss as to the new policy and wounder what and where they can cross the line?
If they search my car without my permission while I am out on a delivery do I have recourse?
I have nothing to hide but I also don't like nosy *******s and this just smells like nosy ******* kind of thing.

I would not sign off on this policy so who know what they will do. just looking for opinions as I may soon be looking for a job.

IGotIt
12-12-2011, 19:21
I believe that if they (or an assigned agent like security) intend on LOOKING through your car, you should be there while they are doing it, and it should be a visual only in the seating area and trunk. I would say they could move blankets or covers to see if anything was hidden under them.

As far as searching you, they (or an assigned agent like security) can ask you to open your coat or outer garment as do a visual. No touching.

I worked at a sports distribution center where we had to open our coats, lunch bags, etc upon leaving the building. our cars were subject to visuals if they had reasonable grounds to believe you were secreting items.

They did catch one lady who used to wear oversize clothes. She was stuffing Levi and Wrangler jeans, and other brand name clothing into the loose clothing and walking out. When they caught her, police were called and a search warrant was executed at her house. She had in excess of $10k worth of stolen property from the distribution center.

I really don't know how much roofing material you could walk away with though.

jtull7
12-12-2011, 19:37
What a Nazi POS employer you work for.

janice6
12-12-2011, 19:43
New policy where I work:

It says they reserve the right to search lockers,bags(if on company property that's fine I understand this rule I don't like it but whatever) but here is the part where I start to have a real problem they say they can search you. and open and search your vehicle.

A little background I am in Ohio and I work at a place that supplies roofing both commercial/residential so honestly there really is nothing to steal that would not be really obvious.

So I am at a loss as to the new policy and wounder what and where they can cross the line?
If they search my car without my permission while I am out on a delivery do I have recourse?
I have nothing to hide but I also don't like nosy *******s and this just smells like nosy ******* kind of thing.

I would not sign off on this policy so who know what they will do. just looking for opinions as I may soon be looking for a job.



I worked for one of the largest Military Hardware companies in the US. They could/and did, routinely search carry items and packages. They could not touch your person. They would involve police or Federal officers for person searches.

I would not permit my vehicle to be searched without my being present. "planting" is a possibility.

However; The Feds caught an employee turning over a SMB to a plain clothes officer, in the parking lot.

bug
12-12-2011, 19:46
I believe that if they (or an assigned agent like security) intend on LOOKING through your car, you should be there while they are doing it, and it should be a visual only in the seating area and trunk. I would say they could move blankets or covers to see if anything was hidden under them.

As far as searching you, they (or an assigned agent like security) can ask you to open your coat or outer garment as do a visual. No touching.

I worked at a sports distribution center where we had to open our coats, lunch bags, etc upon leaving the building. our cars were subject to visuals if they had reasonable grounds to believe you were secreting items.

They did catch one lady who used to wear oversize clothes. She was stuffing Levi and Wrangler jeans, and other brand name clothing into the loose clothing and walking out. When they caught her, police were called and a search warrant was executed at her house. She had in excess of $10k worth of stolen property from the distribution center.

I really don't know how much roofing material you could walk away with though.

I do understand the look in the bag thing and open your coat when leaving work, or in the case of sporting or other events entering.
However I find it hard to believe that they think I am going to sneak a 85lbs bundle of landmark 30 out under my coat.

jdh31313
12-12-2011, 19:47
They will go as far as you will let them. Employer searches tend to be consent searches. If you refuse to consent to search or withdraw consent during a search your job could be potentially in jeopardy. Usually an employer has a written policy in place which covers this subject.

Patchman
12-12-2011, 19:50
As a private entity, your employer is not bound by the 4th A.

Don't know if your state laws have any privacy/search protection extending to employment.

If your employer gives sufficient advance notice of what they intend to do (when, where, how), your options are to comply or leave.

Patchman
12-12-2011, 19:57
I work at a place that supplies roofing both commercial/residential so honestly there really is nothing to steal that would not be really obvious.



Then I'm curious what triggered this whole new search policy.

bug
12-12-2011, 20:10
Then I'm curious what triggered this whole new search policy.

They just came out with a whole new handbook a while back and we are going from a more family owned kind of thing to a more corporate approach.
that's my guess

One of the other policy's I would not sign off on was that equipment we are given to use Is our responsibility to replace if lost,stolen,or broken.

But we are not allowed to have locks on our lockers to keep it in and we can not take it home or lock it in our vehicles. :dunno:
so how how am I supposed to keep the materials safe when i am not around?

PuroMexicano
12-12-2011, 20:11
Have tools been missing recently?
Maybe is a policy against theft.
You need to speak to your boss about your concerns about privacy but also understand what triggered this policy.

bug
12-12-2011, 20:18
Have tools been missing recently?
Maybe is a policy against theft.
You need to speak to your boss about your concerns about privacy but also understand what triggered this policy.

No everyone here is honest to a fault and only time anything has been taken that I am aware of we had a crackhead temp they called in that made off with a pocket full of copper nails
All the tools are kept up front you would have to walk past 3-5 people and they would all wonder why you were getting it.

Hack
12-12-2011, 20:28
Check with your state labor board. Yes, you do have rights as an employee, but they are limited, as it is the employer's property that is being protected. Other than that find a new employer. Best of luck in finding one, as I understand jobs are harder to come by now a days, and I your employer realizes that as well. If it is feasible to park your car off the property, or walk to work, take a bus, you may want to consider doing that. Check with a labor attorney concerning what rights you, and your fellow employees have. Keep in mind that if you push enough that your employer can always find a reason to get rid of you. If your fellow employees want to form up a group you would have some strength in numbers, but unless you are planning on unionizing you may want to be careful in that type of activity. Even if you had plans on forming a union shop you would still have to be careful, because the employer has quite a number of rights available to exercise.

DustyJacket
12-12-2011, 21:11
My employer also has a search everything policy, but I am not aware that they have ever exercised it.

We did have an employe gang war in the parking lot at the office in Denver they shut down before moving me here.

And he handle some sensitive information and documents, to include checks, so they are quite paranoid. Perhaps for a reason.

MeefZah
12-12-2011, 21:56
Private employers in Ohio hold pretty much all the cards. It's perfectly legal to terminate an employee for any reason, so long as they don't cross into gender / racial / sexual orientation / age / similar discrimination.

Ergo, they can implement whatever policy they want and if you refuse to comply with it - let's say by refusing to allow them to check your pockets as you are leaving - you can be fired and you would have no recourse.

If you work in a union shop or are a public sector employee you may have better protections. Private entities in Ohio, though, have become aces at hiding behind the "at will" employment bull****.

Hack
12-17-2011, 04:08
Private employers in Ohio hold pretty much all the cards. It's perfectly legal to terminate an employee for any reason, so long as they don't cross into gender / racial / sexual orientation / age / similar discrimination.

Ergo, they can implement whatever policy they want and if you refuse to comply with it - let's say by refusing to allow them to check your pockets as you are leaving - you can be fired and you would have no recourse.

If you work in a union shop or are a public sector employee you may have better protections. Private entities in Ohio, though, have become aces at hiding behind the "at will" employment bull****.

I decided to rant a bit on this, since I felt like it, and I get sick and tired of hearing from entitlement minded people thinking that the employer; the state; the country; the world, owes them a fricking handout.

Just as a matter of perspective. If a business owner elects to hire employees, it is at the discretion of a business owner in any state, or territory. It is the business owner's property, land, buildings, and anything within it that was bought on the business owner's property belongs to the business owner. In today's economy if you have a job you should be thankful to have the job, and if you believe you are worth more then it is up to you the laborer to find something better for yourself. I find it interesting the attitude of employees now a days. If you go to work for a non union shop you should expect to have to suffer the conditions that go with that, regardless of the conditions, as long as they do not go into criminal liability. If you don't like how the employer treats you, in the case of working for a private business, go elsewhere, for that matter do something different entirely.

Working for someone is something I have done since I have been of age. I grew up in a working class neighborhood, with people working for the employer, be it a union shop or a small business. Some people in the neighborhood had their own small business, but we would all have been considered working class. In the case of my father, while his company still had a place for him to go to work at, he was a union employee. My grandfather whom I did know was a rail road man, working in a union covered position, and owned a business on the side. But, the fact of the matter is that business fails or slows down and a person has to adjust to it. Basically that person adjusts by putting up with stuff he would not ordinarily put up with, such as certain employee conditions, moving to where the job is and so on.

Rant off.

bug
12-17-2011, 07:07
I decided to rant a bit on this, since I felt like it, and I get sick and tired of hearing from entitlement minded people thinking that the employer; the state; the country; the world, owes them a fricking handout.

Just as a matter of perspective. If a business owner elects to hire employees, it is at the discretion of a business owner in any state, or territory. It is the business owner's property, land, buildings, and anything within it that was bought on the business owner's property belongs to the business owner. In today's economy if you have a job you should be thankful to have the job, and if you believe you are worth more then it is up to you the laborer to find something better for yourself. I find it interesting the attitude of employees now a days. If you go to work for a non union shop you should expect to have to suffer the conditions that go with that, regardless of the conditions, as long as they do not go into criminal liability. If you don't like how the employer treats you, in the case of working for a private business, go elsewhere, for that matter do something different entirely.

Working for someone is something I have done since I have been of age. I grew up in a working class neighborhood, with people working for the employer, be it a union shop or a small business. Some people in the neighborhood had their own small business, but we would all have been considered working class. In the case of my father, while his company still had a place for him to go to work at, he was a union employee. My grandfather whom I did know was a rail road man, working in a union covered position, and owned a business on the side. But, the fact of the matter is that business fails or slows down and a person has to adjust to it. Basically that person adjusts by putting up with stuff he would not ordinarily put up with, such as certain employee conditions, moving to where the job is and so on.

Rant off.
I thank everyone for all the info and opinion on the subject.
While I do absolutely understand its there property and the 4a has very little to do with what goes on there.

I will stop them when they think it's ok to open my personal property (my car)
When I am not around and begin searching it!

I am 100% ok with finding a new job if that's the way it has to be.
But people need (employers included) need to know that they are not allowed to walk in you because the economy is bad.

So far nothing has came of the policy so it may have been much talk about nothing.
I was in a union for years and they have some good points and some bad ones as well.






Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Oso
12-17-2011, 07:40
Most companies have rules like this for legal reasons. Most don't ever actually do searches unless they are beyond a doubt sure you are in violation. Good employers don't want to alienate their good workers. It's just bad business for them.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

car541
12-17-2011, 10:09
You always can refuse your consent to a search of your car or person

They then have the right to refuse their consent to allow you to keep working there. Make your decision, then live with the consequences. If you want to make your own workplace rules, start your own business. it is really that simple.

As far as the locker goes, it is theirs. Once you are fired, they aren't going to leave it closed forever.

turretg
12-17-2011, 10:19
I worked at a large armored money depository for 10 + years and while there were signs stating they reserve the right to search employees , they never searched
me and I never observed anyone else being searched upon leaving for the day. I think they kept that ace card in the event they had real evidence or suspicions.

Patchman
12-17-2011, 10:55
But people need (employers included) need to know that they are not allowed to walk in you because the economy is bad.

I was in a union for years and they have some good points and some bad ones as well.


In the 1980s, when I first started working, I was newly hired at a engineering company. Naturally, draftsmen, estimators, etc... got hired or laid off depending on whether the company got a contract(s) or not. I understand that. But after a few months, I realized there was a core of employees who had been there for years. I then learned the boss was an avid bridge (the card game) player, and that that core of employees played bridge with him everyday during lunch.

Hey, it the boss's company. I have no patience for any card games. A lesson well learned.

So, I'm somewhat ambivalent about unions, but union provide a collective voice and their members are not each floundering on his/her own.

MeefZah
12-18-2011, 14:18
I decided to rant a bit on this, since I felt like it, and I get sick and tired of hearing from entitlement minded people thinking that the employer; the state; the country; the world, owes them a fricking handout.

Just as a matter of perspective. If a business owner elects to hire employees, it is at the discretion of a business owner in any state, or territory. It is the business owner's property, land, buildings, and anything within it that was bought on the business owner's property belongs to the business owner. In today's economy if you have a job you should be thankful to have the job, and if you believe you are worth more then it is up to you the laborer to find something better for yourself. I find it interesting the attitude of employees now a days. If you go to work for a non union shop you should expect to have to suffer the conditions that go with that, regardless of the conditions, as long as they do not go into criminal liability. If you don't like how the employer treats you, in the case of working for a private business, go elsewhere, for that matter do something different entirely.

Working for someone is something I have done since I have been of age. I grew up in a working class neighborhood, with people working for the employer, be it a union shop or a small business. Some people in the neighborhood had their own small business, but we would all have been considered working class. In the case of my father, while his company still had a place for him to go to work at, he was a union employee. My grandfather whom I did know was a rail road man, working in a union covered position, and owned a business on the side. But, the fact of the matter is that business fails or slows down and a person has to adjust to it. Basically that person adjusts by putting up with stuff he would not ordinarily put up with, such as certain employee conditions, moving to where the job is and so on.

Rant off.

Was this directed at me? You quoted my comment in your reply. I was adressing the OP's question, since we are both in Ohio.

I don't think that it is unreasonable or demonstrating a sense of entitlement to expect that as an employee, you have some sort of protection from unjust termination. It's one thing to come to work drunk and do a ****ty job and get fired because of it; it's another to be a solid employee and get fired only because the boss dislikes you. Ohio private sector employers have been using the at will employment laws to promote nepotism, and threaten / bully employees. I've heard of employers firing one employee who made negative comments about the bosses so as to send a message to other employees that free speech would not be tolerated on premises.

The point of my original post and this follow up is to advise the OP that complaince with his company's policies is well advised, since there are numerous instances where emplyers have fired employees for a whole lot less.

Pepper45
12-18-2011, 16:20
As in other states, Oregon allows an employer to coerce you into consenting to a search. They can fire you if you refuse consent. They cannot enter your vehicle without your permission, period. To do so is a crime.


My weak union rant: Unions protect the weak, the lazy, the incompetent. To truly achieve the benefits provided by my union, I would need to abandon my ideals, my morals, and any shred of decency, and simply start being lazy and worthless, or even have as many other people as possible question my integrity. I wish this state was a "right to work" state. Having union dues removed from your check against your will, and being represented by people who you hold nothing in common with, who are only representing themselves, who advocate cronyism, and having to stomach this as a condition of employment really galls me. I'd happily negotiate my own wages and benefits, and keep my money. Never had a problem keeping a job before I was a union member, I doubt I'd have a problem if they evaporated tomorrow.

Javelin
12-18-2011, 16:23
If a non-governmental agency wants to search me or my car they can go - well they can - yeah not going to happen.

If they want to search my vehicle - I'd suggest calling a judge and getting a warrant. That way I have at least some paper trail for the ensuing lawsuit that I will no doubt drop before they could finish searching the trunk on my BMW.

Misty02
12-18-2011, 16:37
I do understand the look in the bag thing and open your coat when leaving work, or in the case of sporting or other events entering.
However I find it hard to believe that they think I am going to sneak a 85lbs bundle of landmark 30 out under my coat.

At times it is not what they sell they are protecting but information, data, client lists, and other documents. A person could walk out with lots of proprietary information in a tiny USB drive.

Other times businesses also enter unreasonable contracts (they sign without negotiating because they want the job and later regret all the red tape, but too late by then) that forces the business to comply with secrecy agreements and they must provide evidence they are protecting the information, including the methods in place to guarantee it.

Iím not saying those are the reason, just some of the many possibilities.

.

Misty02
12-18-2011, 16:45
They just came out with a whole new handbook a while back and we are going from a more family owned kind of thing to a more corporate approach.
that's my guess

One of the other policy's I would not sign off on was that equipment we are given to use Is our responsibility to replace if lost,stolen,or broken.

But we are not allowed to have locks on our lockers to keep it in and we can not take it home or lock it in our vehicles. :dunno:
so how how am I supposed to keep the materials safe when i am not around?

I wouldn’t have signed that one either.

I became the biggest pain in the rear when our company first came out with the “Code of Ethics” we all had to sign. This was nearly 20 years ago. There were things there that didn’t apply at the time (because I didn’t have the money to invest) but could apply in the future. It also went into accepting gifts, a practice that was normal in the industry at the time. Then our manager said it was ok, that corporate just wanted to make sure people were not abusing it, etc. After 4 months of going back and forth I was told to just sign it! I agreed to sign it, but included a tiny note (and voiced it loudly) that I was signing under duress.

I was the first person in our office to thank the sender but return a gift that was valued in excess of $25 (as per company policy). I opened a whole can of worms with that one. I think people still want to lynch me for that one. :supergrin: (not the only reason they may feel justified for either, mind you)

ETA: Oh, we also have to participate in webinars and later sign acknowledgement that we participated and understood about harassment, international ant bribery laws, and a bunch of other stuff that I don’t even remember (annually). Welcome to the big corporate world! :) Most of it truly doesn’t affect me and I’ve never seen anyone searched. Nonetheless, the policy and agreement is there.
.

DaBigBR
12-18-2011, 21:28
If a non-governmental agency wants to search me or my car they can go - well they can - yeah not going to happen.

If they want to search my vehicle - I'd suggest calling a judge and getting a warrant. That way I have at least some paper trail for the ensuing lawsuit that I will no doubt drop before they could finish searching the trunk on my BMW.

I'm curious...where you live, is it possible for a person who is not a peace officer to apply for a search warrant? Certainly it is not possible for a person who is not a peace officer to serve a search warrant.

What specifically would you intend to sue for?

Hack
12-19-2011, 09:14
Was this directed at me? You quoted my comment in your reply. I was adressing the OP's question, since we are both in Ohio.

I don't think that it is unreasonable or demonstrating a sense of entitlement to expect that as an employee, you have some sort of protection from unjust termination. It's one thing to come to work drunk and do a ****ty job and get fired because of it; it's another to be a solid employee and get fired only because the boss dislikes you. Ohio private sector employers have been using the at will employment laws to promote nepotism, and threaten / bully employees. I've heard of employers firing one employee who made negative comments about the bosses so as to send a message to other employees that free speech would not be tolerated on premises.

The point of my original post and this follow up is to advise the OP that complaince with his company's policies is well advised, since there are numerous instances where emplyers have fired employees for a whole lot less.

It is directed at anyone to take from it what they want. I was ranting concerning my personal opinions concerning employer/employee relations. And yes I quoted you. I am not disagreeing with you.

GWSHARK
12-19-2011, 12:28
Can you park offsite and walk on to their property? In that case they wouldn't be able to touch your vehicle.

eracer
12-19-2011, 12:48
If my employer wanted to search my vehicle, they better be accompanied by a LEO with a warrant in hand.

And if they fire me, they'd better have a good lawyer. My car is my castle here in Florida. No employer has the right to search my vehicle without consent, regardless of whose property the vehicle sits on.

Hack
12-19-2011, 13:04
If my employer wanted to search my vehicle, they better be accompanied by a LEO with a warrant in hand.

And if they fire me, they'd better have a good lawyer. My car is my castle here in Florida. No employer has the right to search my vehicle without consent, regardless of whose property the vehicle sits on.

Well, that is one thing. Different states have different rulings on that kind of thing. How does that work in Florida if you are on Federal property within their jurisdiction?

smokeross
12-19-2011, 13:19
Worked a turnaround in a Tosco Refinery in California. The rule was you were not allowed to lock your vehicle. Thugs with flashlights and dogs roamed the parking lot looking in vehicles. If they decided to search your vehicle, they did. Dog and all. Looking for ANYTHING. Several people were run off for having EMPTY alcohol containers (beer cans) found in their vehicle. One guy was run off for an empty can in the back of his open pickup bed. He doesn't drink. If they ran you off, you were permanently blackballed from ALL Tosco refineries.
Bunch of Gestapo wanna be Thugs.

Misty02
12-19-2011, 13:36
Well, that is one thing. Different states have different rulings on that kind of thing. How does that work in Florida if you are on Federal property within their jurisdiction?

or if you previously consented to it in writing?

.

bug
12-19-2011, 18:06
At times it is not what they sell they are protecting but information, data, client lists, and other documents. A person could walk out with lots of proprietary information in a tiny USB drive.

Other times businesses also enter unreasonable contracts (they sign without negotiating because they want the job and later regret all the red tape, but too late by then) that forces the business to comply with secrecy agreements and they must provide evidence they are protecting the information, including the methods in place to guarantee it.

I’m not saying those are the reason, just some of the many possibilities.

.

You know this could have been the cause our sales guys are/have been very careless with our info before.

bug
12-19-2011, 18:15
Can you park offsite and walk on to their property? In that case they wouldn't be able to touch your vehicle.

No good options for this, with out parking illegally or trespassing
those option are not good.

Misty02
12-19-2011, 20:40
You know this could have been the cause our sales guys are/have been very careless with our info before.

We all have salesmen that make the deal without reading the contract, sign on the dotted line and come back all happy and giggly about the sale. Often they donít follow procedure and the contract doesnít get reviewed by legal first. Then everyone is scrambling to meet all the requirements that would have been negotiated out if procedure had been followed.

Weíve had cases where those conditions were so horrible that the company made the salesperson pay for the cost of implementation to the tune of losing all commission for that deal and a couple of times more than that. Guess what? Some still do it in spite knowing what the possible consequences are. We have one with such secrecy clause that the information cannot be maintained in our regular server as none of the information pertaining to that project can be maintained off site, which is (for disaster planning reasons) where our back-ups are.
.

eracer
12-20-2011, 04:36
or if you previously consented to it in writing?

.The law in Florida has a specific clause that prohibits employers from making such consent a condition of employment, and provides redress if the employer violates that clause. At least insofar as searching for a weapon.

eracer
12-20-2011, 04:40
Well, that is one thing. Different states have different rulings on that kind of thing. How does that work in Florida if you are on Federal property within their jurisdiction?Not sure about that, but I will look it up. Since I can have a weapon in my vehicle, but not on my person, on Federal property (District Court, etc.) I suspect the same would hold true for a Federal Government employer. But I don't know for certain.

Misty02
12-20-2011, 06:52
The law in Florida has a specific clause that prohibits employers from making such consent a condition of employment, and provides redress if the employer violates that clause. At least insofar as searching for a weapon.

Correct. The protection afforded employees under the 790.251 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.251.html)Florida statute addresses the employeeís right to keep firearms in their vehicle, employers are not allowed to inquire whether or not we have firearms in the vehicle either. They also cannot search for the purpose of determining whether or not a firearm is being kept in them or take any action if one is found. The search would also be deemed to be illegal. Do note; however, that it states the following in (4)(b):


A search of a private motor vehicle in the parking lot of a public or private employer to ascertain the presence of a firearm within the vehicle may only be conducted by on-duty law enforcement personnel, based upon due process and must comply with constitutional protections.


However, nothing contained in that statute addresses searches to which the employee consented to. It just states the employer has no right to search for that very single specific purpose. If they search for other reasons and find a firearm, then they canít dismiss the employee for that reason. Please note also that this protection doesnít apply to those that have company vehicles (main reason Iíll never accept one). There are other exceptions as well.

Once we sign an agreement consenting to a search that can be conducted any time of our belongings, our person and our vehicle they can search (just not for firearms). With Florida being an at will state they can fire you for any other reason.

Misty02
12-20-2011, 07:10
Well, that is one thing. Different states have different rulings on that kind of thing. How does that work in Florida if you are on Federal property within their jurisdiction?

790.251 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.251.html) <~~~~ Florida Statute dealing with motor vehicles

The statute contains exceptions, Hack; they are enumerated at the end of the page in the link provided above. A few that may apply depending on the work done by the employer:


(d) Property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which are conducted substantial activities involving national defense, aerospace, or homeland security.

(e) Property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of combustible or explosive materials regulated under state or federal law, or property owned or leased by an employer who has obtained a permit required under 18 U.S.C. s. 842 to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in explosive materials on such property.

(g) Any other property owned or leased by a public or private employer or the landlord of a public or private employer upon which possession of a firearm or other legal product by a customer, employee, or invitee is prohibited pursuant to any federal law, contract with a federal government entity, or general law of this state.


Iím told that companies like Disney use (e) to deny their employees the right to maintain a firearm in their vehicle. Apparently they can use it as the fireworks they are licensed to store and use constitute explosives. I cannot say I have ever read their employee manual or know that to be a fact which Iíve confirmed.

.

eracer
12-20-2011, 12:48
Correct. The protection afforded employees under the 790.251 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.251.html)Florida statute addresses the employee’s right to keep firearms in their vehicle, employers are not allowed to inquire whether or not we have firearms in the vehicle either. They also cannot search for the purpose of determining whether or not a firearm is being kept in them or take any action if one is found. The search would also be deemed to be illegal. Do note; however, that it states the following in (4)(b):



However, nothing contained in that statute addresses searches to which the employee consented to. It just states the employer has no right to search for that very single specific purpose. If they search for other reasons and find a firearm, then they can’t dismiss the employee for that reason. Please note also that this protection doesn’t apply to those that have company vehicles (main reason I’ll never accept one). There are other exceptions as well.

Once we sign an agreement consenting to a search that can be conducted any time of our belongings, our person and our vehicle they can search (just not for firearms). With Florida being an at will state they can fire you for any other reason.I see your point, and I was indeed inferring that the statute prohibiting search for a firearms prohibited warrantless search altogether.

Misty02
12-20-2011, 13:05
I see your point, and I was indeed inferring that the statute prohibiting search for a firearms prohibited warrantless search altogether.

I understood your comment to mean that as well. I donít much like the idea of the search consent myself, but in many cases I understand why it got there. The wording most use in those agreements is not much to my liking either, they donít state the reason or the specific (or at least narrow to work related) items they can search for. I gave it half a second of thought to modifying mine to wording I believed was fair to us both, then I remembered what happened many years earlier when I just ended up signing under duress and decided to skip the drama in the middle. :)

(plus, I didnít want to give people yet another reason for dirty looks.)

.

ray9898
12-21-2011, 09:57
How far can they go? As far as the company policy you agree to abide by allows. You have no Constitutional protection when it comes to a private employer.