What would you do?

[Nnobby45]

Seems like the company is being pretty honest and straightforward. Too bad some employees don't have the same honesty and integrity as the employer.

OK, perhaps calling an employer dishonest for being more interested in their own liability than their contractor's life is the wrong terminology. Call it self interest. Call being armed in defiance of such a policy as acting one's self interest, also.

I'm getting tired of lectures David, and Peezakiller.

You've expressed your opinions before and your positions are clear inre: to "dishonesty" of those who won't be disarmed by their employer. What what you have done in my case?

1. Quit, and give up 27 years of benefits, including retirement and health care and find another job that most likely has the same rules?

2. Go unarmed on my own time, and violate my own committment to myself that existed before the company changed the rules?

I know you aren't going to give honest answers to those questions. It's going to be more lecturing---isn't it?

You consider delivering drugs to nursing homes to be a dangerous job?

I consider driving alone with large amounts of drugs potentially very dangerous. People who travel alone often carry for their own protection for reasons obvious to virtually everyone on this thread---even when they aren't carrying enough class one and two narcotics on just one trip to furnish numerous hospitals.

If the drugs didn't include those types of drugs, then I wouldn't count on Bubba and his friends to know that, anyway. That'd probably make 'em more likely to shoot me when they discovered they'd heisted a bunch of anti-biotics and hemorrhoid meds.

[Brian Pfleuger]

I'm getting tired of lectures David, and Peezakiller.

My intentions in this discussion have been made crystal clear here. (Last Paragraph)

How exactly is my opinion a "lecture" while yours is not? Should I be tired of YOUR lecturing?



Considering that we're on to personal issues instead of the topic at hand the mods will be along to close this one shortly...

[Nnobby45]

Quote:
I'm getting tired of lectures David, and Peezakiller.

My intentions in this discussion have been made crystal clear here. (Last Paragraph)

How exactly is my opinion a "lecture" while yours is not? Should I be tired of YOUR lecturing?

That was an invitation and opportunity for you to demonstrate that you could answer a simple question with regards to my two options. I predicted in advance that you wouldn't answer the question, and that you would respond with more lecturing, which now amounts to a lecture about my lecturing.

But still now answere. And there won't be, will there?

[Ricklin]

The OP is NOT AN EMPLOYEE. He stated in post #1 he is an independent contractor, as an independent contractor his work can not be "directed"
He has every right to refuse to follow this rule, as this company can not direct his work.

[Brian Pfleuger]

I already did answer Nnobby, over and over. Before you even asked it, in fact. You have made it crystal clear that you do not like my answer. That doesn't change my answer.


Choose between money and integrity. Those are the choices. You can make a long list of the "types" of money. It doesn't change the choice. I don't care what choice you make. Really, I don't.


You didn't answer my question.

How is my opinion a "lecture" while yours is not?

[Brian Pfleuger]

He has every right to refuse to follow this rule, as this company can not direct his work.

That's entirely possible. As such, he should OPENLY refuse to follow the rule and live with the consequences, such as not being hired by that company. He should NOT ignore the rule and pretend to follow it.

[Nnobby45]

I already did answer Nnobby. You have made it crystal clear that you do not like my answer. That doesn't change my answer.

Yes, we've both made ourselves clear. The last bicker is yours.

[IDAHO83501]

you can get another job, as far as I know you only get one life, and it doesn't come with a rewind button. Understand the risks, take responsibility, and do what you think is right,,,,,,,

[pax]

I think this one is about done. What do you guys think -- is it time for a close?

pax

[Ricklin]

Peetza:
Not only possible he stated in post #1 that he is an IC, that is all the difference in the world, and invalidates the argument.

He can choose to tell the company he is not going to follow the rule, his employer is not in a position to enforce that and maintain his IC status.

I would quietly carry, and know I have an ace in the hole with the company should the issue arise.

The IRS takes the IC thing very seriously, if the OP were to produce a dated "list of rules" from the company the company will get nailed hard by the IRS back to the date "the rules" went in to effect, or further back. The company will be held responsible for all the taxes not remitted. They can not direct the work they are very clear about it, and it is enforced.

I've been an IC for many years, I know of which I speak.

[Tennessee Gentleman]

Originally Posted by pax

I think this one is about done. What do you guys think -- is it time for a close?

I vote to close it. This issue has been hashed out a lot and no one is likely to profit from it continuing. As Glenn said in another thread; Morality is something that is open to debate amoung gentle folk. Or something like that

[LoneWolf22056]

The right to carry at work really depends on the work that you're doing.

If, say, you're an Electrical Engineer working on a program that provides certain electronic devices per government contract, chances are that's a "need to know basis" environment and all things going on in the area need to be watched closely. Most times they won't even let you bring a cell phone, pager, or any electronic device. Could you imagine bringing a gun into a place like that? There are spies who would love to get ahold of some of this stuff and report back to their host countries with their findings. This is stuff you would NOT want any other nation to have. Do you think they're going to take a chance and let YOU carry a gun to work? Nope. Even though you'd need a very thorough background check before you could work, there are rules and limitations for security reasons. Let's say somebody slipped through the background check and DID bring a gun. They can steal whatever they like and escape. This is unlikely because of all the screening you go through just to enter the building, but still. Imagine that.

Top secret projects aside, I don't think that you have a real need to carry a weapon in the workplace unless you're a cop or security contractor. Workplace violence is a real dangerous things. I'm sure you've all had days where your co-workers did things that just irritated you to no end. If somebody got pushed "over the edge" and started shooting up the place, what then? I know that you feel slighted because it's your 2nd amendment right, but try to think in terms of the big picture. Why not keep a strongbox in your vehicle and leave your gun there? You can go to work, and, should your perceived imminent hostile takeover actually happen, MORE THAN LIKELY you will be able to go out a window or a door and escape.

You have to think about it this way. If you're allowed to carry a gun, then everyone else is going to be allowed to as well. Do you really want your co-workers or new co-workers you've never met before walking around with a gun? You don't know how they behave. Look at all the school shooters. Most times it's someone that nobody really knows, and they're bottling up all this rage until one day they just go and shoot everyone.

If you really feel the need to keep your gun on you 24/7 in a workplace that won't allow it, keep it in your car. As long as you don't announce it to everyone that you have it, nobody will know and nobody will care.

[cerberus65]

I wasn't going to add anything else to this thread but LoneWolf has "inspired" me. :-)

I'm sure you've all had days where your co-workers did things that just irritated you to no end. If somebody got pushed "over the edge" and started shooting up the place, what then?

Yes, I've had days like that. But I don't care how annoyed I get, I would quit long before I would ever even consider going anywhere close to "the edge". Arguments or disagreements aren't settled with guns. Period.

Now if someone else went "postal", that's a case where I'd definitely want to have the means to defend myself. Wouldn't you?

When I started keeping a gun in my car I noticed that I practically overnight became much more careful not to provoke anyone while driving. I think most folks recognize the immense responsibility involved in carrying a gun (in car, on person, whatever). I would actually feel safer if I knew others here in our "safe" little cube-farm were carrying.

I currently park across the street from my employer and leave my gun in my car. The building I work in is next to some pretty bad neighborhoods but you wouldn't realize that unless you went driving around back behind us. I would love to have my gun on me when I walk to and from the building (especially after dark - and even from the closest parking spaces) but my employer cares more about their liability than any of our safety. This is, of course, in conflict with the responsibility I have to go home to my family each night. I'm still struggling with what my final answer will be to this situation. But it's great to have a place to kick ideas and opinions around. I appreciate all of you and your opinions.

[OldMarksman]

Top secret projects aside, I don't think that you have a real need to carry a weapon in the workplace unless you're a cop or security contractor.

So, the lady who works at the Stop and Rob, the jeweler, and the pharmacist have no "real need", in spite of their vulnerability.....

If you're allowed to carry a gun, then everyone else is going to be allowed to as well. Do you really want your co-workers or new co-workers you've never met before walking around with a gun?

Very similar, I think, to the usual ant-CCW argument. Those who are "allowed" to carry will be dangerous, and those who are not "allowed" will not be armed and will not do anything untoward. Mmmmm....

Look at all the school shooters. Most times it's someone that nobody really knows, and they're bottling up all this rage until one day they just go and shoot everyone.

And all of them do so where they are not "allowed" to have a weapon.

If you really feel the need to keep your gun on you 24/7 in a workplace that won't allow it, keep it in your car.

It will certainly come in handy on the parking lot.

[David Armstrong]

I'm getting tired of lectures David, and Peezakiller.

As peetza said, how is it that us expressing our opinions on a subject whre we disagree with you are lectures while those that offer opinions you agree with are not? Are you lecturing us? Why is it that some expressions of philosophy are OK, but others are not?

What what you have done in my case?

First I think you have narrowed it down to only two options while it is quite possible there are others available, so you have created a false choice issue. But I can tell you that if my job was that important, I would quit carrying, just like probably the majority of your co-workers do. I've never bought into this concept of "I carry a gun, I'm special and don't have to do what everyone else is expected to do."

[David Armstrong]

He stated in post #1 he is an independent contractor, as an independent contractor his work can not be "directed"
He has every right to refuse to follow this rule, as this company can not direct his work.

Sorry, but I've done (and still do) a fair amount of independent contractor work, and that is not correct. A company can specify to the contractor how a job is to be done and what standards are to be met during the perfromance of the job. Yes, he has every right to refuse to follow the rule, but he does not have the right to pretend to be following the rule while he is not doing so.

[Hard Ball]

How much is yor life worth to you?

[Tennessee Gentleman]

Well, since the thread is still open here are a few more comments

I notice some seem to be very defensive of the employer as a paragon of virtue. In fact, employers often engage in legal subterfuge, let's look at that.

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

They honestly tell you what the job is.

Actually many times they don't tell you such. Especially when it involves risk aside from the infamous "other duties as assigned".
Take for example 7-11. Go into a store and ask the manager how many times the store has been robbed and employees injured and he will not tell you. Company Policy. They don't tell those they hire either. Think Pizza Hut warns employees not to go into certain neighborhoods for fear of robbery? Not likely they want the sales. Sounds honest to me

Originally Posted by David Armstrong

They honestly pay you what they agreed to pay you based on you doing the job as you have both agreed to. Seems like the company is being pretty honest and straightforward.

Umm, not really. In many companies if you reveal your salary to another co-worker it is grounds for immediate termination. Why? Because the company doesn't want you to know what they are paying others doing the same work as you who might be making more or less based on unethical reasons (though perhaps not illegal). More honesty from the employer

Originally Posted by OldMarksman

So, the lady who works at the Stop and Rob, the jeweler, and the pharmacist have no "real need", in spite of their vulnerability.....

Great point! And so a moral ethical employer if he bans the carry of firearms for self defense will take reasonable measures to protect employees from harm. That could include several items like bullet proof cashier "cages" and other types of protection.

[cerberus65]

In the same vein as what Tennessee Gentleman is saying...

Most states are right to work. So if your employer decides to pay you less all he/she has to do is give you the choice of "accepting" a lower salary or taking a pink slip. So much for having a contract and abiding by it.

I'm not mentioning this to assert that since corporate behavior is not always moral that we don't need to be moral. I only mention it to assert that things are not always as starkly black and white as we would sometimes like to make them.

[David Armstrong]

Take for example 7-11. Go into a store and ask the manager how many times the store has been robbed and employees injured and he will not tell you.

So what? That has nothing to do with the employer honestly telling you what the job is.

Think Pizza Hut warns employees not to go into certain neighborhoods for fear of robbery? Not likely they want the sales.

Commenting on things one knows nothing about is a rather silly thing to do. Many delivery companies, including Pizza Hut, tell employees not to go into certain areas, and won't accept orders from those areas.

Umm, not really. In many companies if you reveal your salary to another co-worker it is grounds for immediate termination.

Umm, yes, really. Telling somebody else your salary has nothing to do with whether or not the company is honest with you in telling you what your salary is. Once again you try to tie something totally irrelevent into the issue under discussion.

Why? Because the company doesn't want you to know what they are paying others doing the same work as you who might be making more or less based on unethical reasons (though perhaps not illegal).

Nothing unethical about the company paying you a salary that is different from somebody else as long as they have told you in advance what your salary would be and you have agreed that is an appropriate salary for the job you have agreed to do (barring EEOC or other legal requirements). And that is the difference. The company is being open and honest about what they are doing, giving the employee the choice of whether or not to accept the position and the pay. The employee is being dishonest when they secretly violate the rules they have agreed to follow and still take the money. Let's face it, if folks didn't think it was wrong they woldn't have this need to hide it from the employer.

[David Armstrong]

So if your employer decides to pay you less all he/she has to do is give you the choice of "accepting" a lower salary or taking a pink slip. So much for having a contract and abiding by it.

Even in a right to work state if there is a contract it is binding through the duration of the contract unless there is a bankruptcy or such. And again, that is not quite the same. The employer is being honest about it, saying "here is what I am goin gto do, you may participate or not." As opposed to what many here are suggesting, which would be "I decided to cut your pay in half at the first of the month but thought I would keep it a secret from you until payday."

[cerberus65]

Even in a right to work state if there is a contract ...

That's the point of "right to work", there is no contract. They can dismiss you for any reason at any time.

[kgpcr]

Where do you live and work? Is it a bad area? I will agree you by taking the job agreed to THEIR rules not yours. They are not to blame as you had the choice of not taking the job.

[David Armstrong]

That's the point of "right to work", there is no contract. They can dismiss you for any reason at any time.

Yes, they can dismiss you. But they cannot change the terms of the contract, which is what is being discussed. Lots of contracts in right to work states.

[skydiver3346]

Look David, you make some cogent points and defend your arguments well to a certain degree. But I believe that your are too hard lined in your thinking and take other people's comments too personal. There are other opinions out there and that is what this site is all about. We all learn from it.

Bottom line is this: As you say, being honest is important and has merit as you suggest. But it just can't always be a black and white situation. The employer may be honest and then again, maybe they aren't. They may have had a hard prior experience with employees "getting into trouble" with late night delivery of drugs. They are worried that something may go south and do not want to responsibility, etc.

When its all said and done, he needs to go home to his family. Nobody should tell you that you can't carry a gun in your personal vehicle, period... Carrying on your person and/or in a nursing home may be a little different, NOT IN YOUR VEHICLE. Please try and understand. Let's all try and be a little open minded. Thank you.