I do not presume that a CCW is necessary. I assume that when the state licenses someone to do something (in this case, carry) that a business can rely on that judgement by the state from a civil liability stand point. This is similar to the licensing of armed private security.
Police forces are not there to provide protection services. SCOTUS has already ruled that the police do not carry the burden of protection.
After disarming their employees, the liability should shift to the business. IF at time of trial, the business wants to assert that they provided “enough” measures to ensure the safety of their employees, they would be free to bring in such mitigation. However, the assumption of liability is with the employer as they have taken away a individuals ability to defend themselves.
Say it again.