Author Topic: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)  (Read 22908 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline redskin

  • Posts: 53
  • ...our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #20 on: June 05, 2011, 05:25:18 PM »
And that is a Bull excuse. Perhaps I can see it on duty... but if you are off duty you are not their responsibility nor can they be liable for your actions.

No bull. If you have employees carrying guns, and you are aware of it and authorize it, your insurance company will have a fit. There is no doubt about it, your premiums will go up. You might even have to go back to the table with negotiations to get a new insurance plan. Its an expensive thing. Most places are in the business of making money, and shoving it down the barrel of your cashier's pistol is not prudent.

Off duty, you're right. The liability claim doesn't fit. However, you now have a question of reputation and image. If an off-duty employee is strapping, concealed or otherwise, and their sidearm is spotted by a regular customer, on- or off-duty, on or off premises, and that regular customer is not friendly to firearms... well, you've got a problem. And it isn't a problem they'll like. With today's brands being multi-million dollar assets cultivated over decades or centuries, most companies won't want to be the brand that has guns crawling throughout their stores.

EDIT: Starbucks is a good example. They are adamant about their gun policy. They allow carry to the extent that state law allows it. If you turn around and say Starbucks is pro-gun, they'll stop you and say NO. We follow the law, we take no position on gun rights. And for the same reason, they worry about their brand.

Now, you can make whatever argument you like, but it comes down to simple dollars and cents, and its not picking on guns. I work in politics, and I can't tell you how many times I've seen the biggest, fiercest, staunchest Republicans refuse to put political signs in front of their homes or businesses because they worry about losing business. No matter how absurd it seems to me and you, it is a real, valid fear.
« Last Edit: June 05, 2011, 05:28:22 PM by redskin »
A man's country is not a certain area of land, of mountains, rivers and woods, but a principle; and patriotism is loyalty to that principle.

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #21 on: June 05, 2011, 06:00:52 PM »
This is precisely what happen to a friend. His sister didn't like him and others with guns in their business and posed the question of liability to the insurance carrier. All employees were required to sign affidavits of notification that the company's insurance would not be in force if they were in possession of firearms anytime they were on the premises. nd yes premises included the parking area. And it also included while conducting company business off site. This extended to all coverage. Not just liability.

The other family members were pissed at her. But as the co-owner they were powerless to do anything. And other carriers they contacted had the same provisions.
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline scot623

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 301
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #22 on: June 05, 2011, 09:35:34 PM »
A lot of companies do not allow employees to carry off duty. Mine is one of them. Sucks, but I need to pay the bills...I certainly don't visit my store off duty often because of it.

Offline autosurgeon

  • MOC Treasurer
  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1056
  • First Name (Displayed): Ryan
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #23 on: June 06, 2011, 01:34:33 PM »
It just bugs me that a company feels they should be able to tell an employee what to do when they are off duty when that thing is legal and a right to boot.

Again as I said on duty I undertand. I don't like it but I understand it.

I have always wondered how gun shops get away with having their employees strapped if this is such a huge ins. Issue. Hmm I will have to ask some of my LGS's as now I am curious!


Sent from my Droid Flipside using Tapatalk
« Last Edit: June 06, 2011, 01:37:12 PM by autosurgeon »
Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #24 on: June 06, 2011, 02:53:39 PM »
Gun shops have insurance that allows this because they are gun shops and they get insurance for gun shops that covers the liabilities associated with gun shop businesses.
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline redskin

  • Posts: 53
  • ...our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #25 on: June 06, 2011, 11:34:43 PM »
It just bugs me that a company feels they should be able to tell an employee what to do when they are off duty when that thing is legal and a right to boot.

At-will employment is the fuel here. In states where employment must be terminated for a reason, this wouldn't fly. Because you're right, they have no right to tell you what you can or cannot do when you are off-duty (unless you're on their property). But if they can fire you at-will, they can pressure you into following their rules off-duty.

I've been in this predicament before, and I immediately resigned. Its just as much my right to.
A man's country is not a certain area of land, of mountains, rivers and woods, but a principle; and patriotism is loyalty to that principle.

Offline autosurgeon

  • MOC Treasurer
  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1056
  • First Name (Displayed): Ryan
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #26 on: June 07, 2011, 03:24:45 PM »
It just bugs me that a company feels they should be able to tell an employee what to do when they are off duty when that thing is legal and a right to boot.

At-will employment is the fuel here. In states where employment must be terminated for a reason, this wouldn't fly. Because you're right, they have no right to tell you what you can or cannot do when you are off-duty (unless you're on their property). But if they can fire you at-will, they can pressure you into following their rules off-duty.

I've been in this predicament before, and I immediately resigned. Its just as much my right to.

Yep I concur....
Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #27 on: June 07, 2011, 03:36:11 PM »
It just bugs me that a company feels they should be able to tell an employee what to do when they are off duty when that thing is legal and a right to boot.

At-will employment is the fuel here. In states where employment must be terminated for a reason, this wouldn't fly. Because you're right, they have no right to tell you what you can or cannot do when you are off-duty (unless you're on their property). But if they can fire you at-will, they can pressure you into following their rules off-duty.

I've been in this predicament before, and I immediately resigned. Its just as much my right to.

Yep I concur....

So you would like some sort of "protection" from an employer that wants to run his business the way he sees fit? This would require some sort of labor organizing effort. Something along the lines of a... oh lets say  "union". That might work. But I don't see it getting very far in today's political and economic climate. Most people seem to be opposed to this type of organization where the rights of a worker might be protected and represented.
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline autosurgeon

  • MOC Treasurer
  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1056
  • First Name (Displayed): Ryan
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #28 on: June 07, 2011, 05:35:07 PM »
Not entirely true... many right to work states have provisions for protecting the employee from these types of intrusive employer policies.

Also I was agreeing that at will employment is the driving force along with ins issues behind this type of employer nosiness!
Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

Offline redskin

  • Posts: 53
  • ...our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #29 on: June 07, 2011, 09:13:45 PM »
So you would like some sort of "protection" from an employer that wants to run his business the way he sees fit?

Never. I have all the protection I need: I can quit whenever I want to. Finding and training new employees is costly. If people had any balls whatsoever, they'd do a little more quitting on principle. Then employers would treat us all a little better. I don't need legislation to fix the problem for me. Nor do I need to gang up and make threats (read: unionize). All I need is self-empowerment.
A man's country is not a certain area of land, of mountains, rivers and woods, but a principle; and patriotism is loyalty to that principle.

Offline autosurgeon

  • MOC Treasurer
  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1056
  • First Name (Displayed): Ryan
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #30 on: June 08, 2011, 12:32:24 PM »
Good points Redskin! Yep a little less bowing and scraping does wonders for how we are treated in many aspects of life!

Sent from my Droid Flipside using Tapatalk
Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

Offline scot623

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 301
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #31 on: June 08, 2011, 02:56:21 PM »
I agree with your point, but with 12% unemployment, there are a lot of people in line to take your job. Principals only get you so far when you have a mortgage, 2 car payments, various other bills, a wife who had 3 cancer surgeries in the past year(without insurance who knows where we'd be) and a 5 week old baby. Sucks, but it's life.

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #32 on: June 08, 2011, 03:13:38 PM »
Those goons have managed to do the following for me:

Negotiate a living wage so that I only have to work one job
Establish a living retirement fund for me to draw from at an early age.
Establish a annuity fund
Provide healthcare insurance for me that carries into periods of unemployment
Supplemental Unemployment Fund that helps through periods of unemployment
Guaranteed rates of pay for work performed outside of the normal work periods.
Established tool requirements that I provide so that I don't have to provide my employer with equipment and tools.

These are all provided and funded directly by myself and my fellow union members of IBEW Local 58.

There is a reason why there is a need for a Federalist Healthcare Program.
There is a reason why there is a need for a Federalist Retirement Program (SS)
There is a reason why there is OSHA
There is a reason why there are Child Labor Laws

And it doesn't take a genius to figure out the answers.

Standing alone will only get you so far. MOC is a perfect example of this.

The OP would not have even been able to get inside Meijers while OC to have his encounter if not for the joint efforts of this "union".

Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline kc8swy

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #33 on: June 08, 2011, 03:20:33 PM »
No union here, and I enjoy all of those except for an annuity.

Considering MOC hasn't successfully lobbied for an OC law (as one isn't needed) I completely agree with your last statement.  Now if you met to say that the collaborative efforts of MOC members have helped educate the public, I would agree with that.  Or if you were to rephrase that and say attempt to undo the damage of the liberal media, I'd also agree with that.

OP

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #34 on: June 08, 2011, 03:31:04 PM »
No union here, and I enjoy all of those except for an annuity.

Considering MOC hasn't successfully lobbied for an OC law (as one isn't needed) I completely agree with your last statement.  Now if you met to say that the collaborative efforts of MOC members have helped educate the public, I would agree with that.  Or if you were to rephrase that and say attempt to undo the damage of the liberal media, I'd also agree with that.

OP

Chances are that you get to enjoy those benefits directly as a result of organized labor. In those states where organized labor does not have a presence, the situation is completely different.
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline ocdetroit

  • Posts: 462
  • STAY STRONG (WE THE PEOPLE).
  • First Name (Displayed): THE BIG O
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #35 on: June 08, 2011, 05:41:33 PM »
+1. Carry On.
Open carry in Detroit
With both of them.

Offline redskin

  • Posts: 53
  • ...our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #36 on: June 08, 2011, 05:49:30 PM »
I don't see any reason why this thread should be hijacked to support unions, and I am loathe to respond and continue it... but I will.

Union people are quick to tout their indirect benefits, but they aren't as quick to talk about downsides.

  • Union dues, which are often exorbitant.
  • Wages negotiated by Unions are often much higher than fair-market value. For public sector unions, this creates an unnecessary burden on taxpayers.
  • Unrealistic wages create higher cost-of-entry into unionize markets.
  • Union membership is often not optional. If I don't want the benefits of your union, well, too bad. I don't even get the choice (support Right To Work people!).
  • Some nasty acts perpetrated on workers by their fellow union members because a "majority vote" somehow makes it okay to let a guy lose his job.
  • Violence perpetrated by Unions.
  • And many more...

You can love your Union all you want, but don't dress it up in angel wings and pretend it sings soprano. Be honest with yourself and your fellow man.
A man's country is not a certain area of land, of mountains, rivers and woods, but a principle; and patriotism is loyalty to that principle.

Offline autosurgeon

  • MOC Treasurer
  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1056
  • First Name (Displayed): Ryan
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #37 on: June 08, 2011, 06:12:53 PM »
Nah my union rides Harleys and sings bass.... I kid I kid!
Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

Offline Shadow Bear

  • Dark Lord of the Internet
  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 511
  • Human Rights Activist
Re: Encounter today (with recording) Meijers in Holland (North)
« Reply #38 on: June 10, 2011, 12:31:29 PM »
I don't see any reason why this thread should be hijacked to support unions, and I am loathe to respond and continue it... but I will.

Union people are quick to tout their indirect benefits, but they aren't as quick to talk about downsides.

  • Union dues, which are often exorbitant.
  • Wages negotiated by Unions are often much higher than fair-market value. For public sector unions, this creates an unnecessary burden on taxpayers.
  • Unrealistic wages create higher cost-of-entry into unionize markets.
  • Union membership is often not optional. If I don't want the benefits of your union, well, too bad. I don't even get the choice (support Right To Work people!).
  • Some nasty acts perpetrated on workers by their fellow union members because a "majority vote" somehow makes it okay to let a guy lose his job.
  • Violence perpetrated by Unions.
  • And many more...

You can love your Union all you want, but don't dress it up in angel wings and pretend it sings soprano. Be honest with yourself and your fellow man.

There was a time when they were appropriate and necessary. I submit that time has passed. If people got up on their hind legs and walked away from abusive employers, the situation would change. Freedom isn't free, change costs, but the result is priceless.
Its not GUN rights, its HUMAN rights.