No Guns Policy in my Company

[rampart]

What the???!!!

Fudd, does your HR department also double as the Janitorial Service. How are they going to find out if a person really owns firearms if they bought them illegally? I have an axe, machete, and other tools that have been used as human killing tools. When a person wants to kill usually anything will do.


BTW are you going to ask for gun registration when do a credit check on your customers. You never know what an irate customer is capable of.

Leave this one alone.

 

[Thatotherguy]

As I said this was not solely my policy. I only proposed it during the management meeting and everybody unanimously agreed to put it in place.

You must have one of the most naive management teams out there. This is a lawsuit and/or human rights complaint waiting to happen.

 

[Fudd]

I will admit the management team is made up of mostly younger generation in their late 20s and early 30s. But everbody is well educated and has atleast one degree. With a younger management team our company can make policies that are very progressive unlike the old dinosaurs management who by todays standards were very discriminatory.

I deffinitely do not think we can be accused of violating human rights. We have a very liberal hiring policy on the people we hire. We have various visible minorities, sexual orientation individuals in the company and we even have a transgender person in accounts recievable.

 

[Thatotherguy]

I deffinitely do not think we can be accused of violating human rights.

You're absolutely wrong there. What you're proposing discriminates against people based upon something legal that they do in their personal lives. Discrimination of any sort is a potential human rights case.

Basically, you've come up with an idea based upon an idealistic concept, and you and your management team failed to think about the consequences of it. It really is a lawsuit waiting to happen.

 

[Fudd]

As one of the other managers had brought up. If we do not create a policy that promotes work place safety then we can be sued especially if someting happens. Afterall this is most importantly a work place safety issue.

 

[Thatotherguy]

As one of the other managers had brought up. If we do not create a policy that promotes work place safety then we can be sued especially if someting happens. Afterall this is most importantly a work place safety issue.

The whole problem is that your policy is about things outside of the workplace. If you want a policy to prevent guns at work, you're free to have a policy forbidding them, and you're free to install metal detectors, or whatever other security measures you deem appropriate to enforce the policy. It's illegal for you to enforce a policy that prevents an employee (or potential employee) from engaging in any given activity outside of work, as long as that activity is legal, and does not constitute a conflict of interest. The best you can do is ask employees to sign a contract agreeing not to own a gun, but if you do that you have to ensure that the employee knows that they have no obligation to sign the contract, and that failure to sign the contract will have no bearing on their employment status.

Seriously, before your company puts this policy into place, have them run it by a lawyer specializing in employment and human rights cases. I practically guarantee they'd advise you not to implement the policy.

 

[LightBearer]

Fudd your missing the whole point! Guns dont kill people, people kill people. Rub those 2 brain cells you got together and see what happens.

 

[Thatotherguy]

So what if a disgrunteld employee who doesn't own fireams, aquires one legally or illegaly and shoots up a staff party? What if he makes a big ass home made explosive and blows up the entire party? What if he's some ridiculous ninja or something and kills everyone by hand?

I hate it when a disgruntled employee turns out to be a ridiculous ninja!

 

[rockmyworld36]

Cars are dangerous. I don't think you should hire anyone with a car. You never know when somebody might decide to run down their coworkers.

Baseball players scare me. All that swinging of bats. Crazy! I bet baseball players are all going to bash someone's head one day.

 

[schizo_man]

ok one last thought here.

Any policy that restricts the rights of employees should be looked at again. Why not invest time and money developing an incentive plan for people (staff) to donate their time to social agencies ie working in soup kitchens, women's shelters, etc. Offer to pay for courses for your employee's to take, ie. suicide intervention and prevention, cultural awareness courses.

That way you can help your employees become more community/safety minded without being heavy handed. you accomplish the same thing, in a better more productive way.

also puts your companies money where it's mouth is

 

[Thatotherguy]

Cars are dangerous. I don't think you should hire anyone with a car. You never know when somebody might decide to run down their coworkers.

Baseball players scare me. All that swinging of bats. Crazy! I bet baseball players are all going to bash someone's head one day.

Along those lines, Fudd's company should refuse to hire anyone with an internet connection. Anyone with an internet connection can easily find out how to make explosives from common household items, bring them in to work, and blow the place up. They should also refuse to hire anyone with the ability to purchase gasoline, a glass bottle of some variety, and a rag. Those people could hurl molotov cocktails at the office.

Seriously, I understand the motivation behind this pie-in-the-sky policy, and trying to reduce the possibility of workplace violence is a laudable goal, but this is a terribly impractical, ineffectual, and almost certainly illegal way to do it.

 

[island-guy]

I'll just sit back and wait for the news story about a company being sued for discrimination for refusing to hire someone because their spouse is an RCMP officer.

After all, they have at least one gun in their house...

Ka-Ching... Fudd gets laid off because the company has to pay out their entire equity to lawyers and the plaintiff.

By the way, you do know that far more gun crimes are committed in the US by blacks than whites, right?

Better stop hiring black people too!!

Ka-Ching...

The lawyers just love dim-witted managers like this...

 

[island-guy]

Uh... I just thought of something...

Ok, suppose someone lies on the form and denies having a gun, then later after they have put their heart and soul into the company for a couple of years, their boss finds out that they do in fact own a gun.

So, their boss fires them, for owning a gun.

Making them very very angry.

Brilliant strategy.

(and they wonder why people say that left wing activist types are short-sighted)

 

[island-guy]

Another interesting fact that a quick google search turned up:

The most common weapon used in workplace homicides in China is rat poison.

If your company has any offices in Richmond, they better make sure that they have a 'no rat poison owners' policy in place!

 

[Thatotherguy]

Another interesting fact that a quick google search turned up:

The most common weapon used in workplace homicides in China is rat poison.

Wow. That's an interesting factoid. I guess I just don't have what it takes to be a killer, since it never would have occurred to me to use rat poison as a weapon for a workplace homicide.

 

[spinynorman]

If retarded ideas ever reach $100 a barrel, I want the drilling rights to your management teams' heads. Why the fuck did I bother going the legit' path and legally acquiring and registering the firearms that I have now? Progressive management? Bullshit. Just make sure your little witch hunt goes after all recreational drug users, closet pedophiles(if you work for a hi-tech company, no doubt you've cubicle farms full of them), and people who don't recycle properly.

Merry Fucking Christmas or as your company would say "a non-demonational celebration of empowerment of Christianity-oppressed individuals"

Try saying no to these

 

[LightBearer]

Thats a 1911 on the left and a Beretta M92 on the right

 

[Validator]

Ifind this discussion really interesting and entertaining. Although I can't say I agree with the PROPOSED policy (its not in effect), I have to question are guns really like cars? Baseball bats? Or "the internet"?

There's something intrinsic about the gun and the purpose it serves - to kill people. While the other means (with exception of a ninja haha) serves a different primary purpose but then abused or misused to serve as a weapon. Sure people kill people, but the gun makes it a whooolllee lot easier than spending 15 years learning some specific ninja chop. All I'm saying is the comparison of a baseball bat or even a knife to a gun is not really a fair one. IMO of course.

 

[LightBearer]

http://www.juliegoloski.com/julie-g-gallery.htm

Say no to her....

 

[mustangjoe]

I as a "legally registered owner" of an air rifle I did propose an exception to this policy. Potential employess still have the right to own an air rifle if they want to.

lol.. Fudd owns an air rifle..what, are you 12?