What's next for guns at work

March 19, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Beginning July 1, employees will be able to bring guns to work in Indiana. Now what?

Fallout will emerge on two tracks, predicts Indianapolis attorney Paul Sinclair. The vast majority of employers will figure out how to accommodate the statute Gov. Mitch Daniels signed this week and go on with their business. And a few employers might challenge it in court.

Indiana is the 13th state to adopt legislation allowing employees to keep guns in locked vehicles– the purpose, contended the National Rifle Association, being to allow workers to defend themselves on their way to and from jobs.

The movement started in Oklahoma after some workers were fired for leaving guns in their vehicles on company property during hunting season. The resulting Oklahoma guns-at-work statute was upheld last year by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, which noted the Occupational Safety and Health Administration didn’t regard the law as conflicting with safe workplace provisions.

The Indiana statute sailed through both legislative chambers over howls from business groups and such major employers as Eli Lilly and Co. and Cummins. And days before Daniels applied his signature, an Indiana Department of Workforce Development worker shot up a Portage branch office after getting an unfavorable performance review.

In a statement, Daniels said he inked the legislation because of clear gun-rights language in federal and state constitutions, and the “overwhelming consensus” in the House and Senate. However, he added that the General Assembly might consider ironing out ambiguities to prevent unnecessary litigation.

Sinclair agrees that ambiguity could give rise to lawsuits. The main flashpoint would likely be exceptions written into the statute—“child caring institutions,” for example. Just what is “child caring?” he asks rhetorically. Is a library exempted when school children arrive during a field trip?

Employers will try to wriggle into exemptions that also include domestic violence shelters and some public utilities, among others, Sinclair says.

Challenging the statute in court would be so expensive that, realistically, only the largest companies would try. The cost of getting an injunction to put the law on hold could cost $50,000 in legal fees, he says, and if the process wended its way through appeals, the cost could easily shoot to several hundred thousand dollars.

“It’s much more practical for employers to try to comply with this rather than put all their eggs in one basket to challenge it,” he says.

However, the statute also has loopholes. Here’s just one: What if an employer demands that all workers with guns in vehicles surrender the keys while they’re at work? The statute wouldn’t appear to prevent that so long as the employer didn’t discriminate among the workers with guns.

The issue is a tough one for Sinclair, personally. Asked if he would have signed the bill, he defers, saying he hadn’t attended all of the hearings or heard all of the testimony.

On the one hand, Sinclair, who owns guns, is sympathetic to the argument Daniels made on Second Amendment grounds. On the other, he’s concerned about eroding property rights.

“There is a difficult balance struck here,” Sinclair says.

What about you? How do you feel about the new statute, and how do you feel about guns on workplace property?

Any thoughts on how employers should respond?
 

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Property Vs Property
    The employees car is private property too. As long as the parking lot is open to the public then whatever's in the car should not be restricted. The employer should not have the authority to disarm people driving to and from work, including stops for dinner, grocery store, etc. That's what they do when they have a no guns policy.

    Those who are going to misuse firearms don't care about one more rule against it.
    • No real horror stories
      Eleven other states, eh? That would seem to give enough of a trackrecord to show that those yelling the loudest actually have no data to back up their visions of horror and gloom.
    • the Morons With Guns ARE out there...
      This is intended to allow me to protect myself from the freakin' morons with guns. Not every person with a gun is a feakin' moron, ya freakin' moron. Freakin' morons with keyboards!
    • Gettin it done
      Trust me if I were hell bent on shooting somebody,regardless if it were in my car or in a closet at home..I would get the job done!
    • Schools
      Every kindergarden kid should be allowed to pack a gun. Another 5-year old steals your milk and cookies? Shoot 'em. Thank God for the Second Amendment.

      Post a comment to this blog

      COMMENTS POLICY
      We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
       
      You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
       
      Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
       
      No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
       
      We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
       

      Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

      Sponsored by
      ADVERTISEMENT
      1. I am so impressed that the smoking ban FAILED in Kokomo! I might just move to your Awesome city!

      2. way to much breweries being built in indianapolis. its going to be saturated market, if not already. when is enough, enough??

      3. This house is a reminder of Hamilton County history. Its position near the interstate is significant to remember what Hamilton County was before the SUPERBROKERs, Navients, commercial parks, sprawling vinyl villages, and acres of concrete retail showed up. What's truly Wasteful is not reusing a structure that could still be useful. History isn't confined to parks and books.

      4. To compare Connor Prairie or the Zoo to a random old house is a big ridiculous. If it were any where near the level of significance there wouldn't be a major funding gap. Put a big billboard on I-69 funded by the tourism board for people to come visit this old house, and I doubt there would be any takers, since other than age there is no significance whatsoever. Clearly the tax payers of Fishers don't have a significant interest in this project, so PLEASE DON'T USE OUR VALUABLE MONEY. Government money is finite and needs to be utilized for the most efficient and productive purposes. This is far from that.

      5. I only tried it 2x and didn't think much of it both times. With the new apts plus a couple other of new developments on Guilford, I am surprised it didn't get more business. Plus you have a couple of subdivisions across the street from it. I hope Upland can keep it going. Good beer and food plus a neat environment and outdoor seating.

      ADVERTISEMENT