Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TXnMA
The Employer's rights only extend to telling you whether or not your tires are allowed to contact (park on) his pavement -- or whether or not he will employ you.

And if he conditions that permission on what is in your car? Let's take guns out of the equation. Say an employer makes a rule that you cannot leave valuables in your car in his lot, because he believes that would attract thieves. You agree, but decide to leave some jewelry in the car, because your work precludes its wearing during work. Your boss discovers that, and terminates your employment for violating his rules that you agreed to.

Valid or invalid? Is your fundamental right to own property superior to his fundamental right to decide what is allowed on his property?

44 posted on 03/14/2007 8:48:43 AM PDT by LexBaird (98% satisfaction guaranteed. There's just no pleasing some people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]


To: LexBaird; TXnMA
TXnMA: "--- The Employer's rights only extend to telling you whether or not your tires are allowed to contact (park on) his pavement -- or whether or not he will employ you. --"

Lex:
And if he conditions that permission on what is in your car?

Your employers 'conditions' cannot deprive his employees of their constitutional rights.

Let's take guns out of the equation.

Lets not. Guns are beyond question an enumerated right.

Say an employer makes a rule that you cannot leave valuables in your car in his lot, because he believes that would attract thieves. You agree, but decide to leave some jewelry in the car, because your work precludes its wearing during work. Your boss discovers that, and terminates your employment for violating his rules that you agreed to.

Your boss made an unreasonable 'rule', coerced your agreement to it, then violated your property [your vehicle] searching to find his 'contraband'. A jury will laugh him out of court.

Valid or invalid? Is your fundamental right to own property superior to his fundamental right to decide what is allowed on his property?

Property owners who do business in the USA are obligated to obey our "Law of the Land". [just as all of us are] -- Our supreme law says we have a right to own & carry arms, which shall not be infringed.

Trying to restrict the carrying of arms to & from work is an infringement, no matter who initiates the 'ban'.

47 posted on 03/14/2007 9:15:14 AM PDT by tpaine (" My most important function on the Supreme Court is to tell the majority to take a walk." -Scalia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

To: LexBaird
And if he conditions that permission on what is in your car? Let's take guns out of the equation. Say an employer makes a rule that you cannot leave valuables in your car in his lot, because he believes that would attract thieves.

Let's say that the employer does not choose to employ Jewish folks, or ones whose skin is darker than his own.

75 posted on 03/15/2007 6:28:23 AM PDT by archy (Et Thybrim multo spumantem sanguine cerno. [from Virgil's *Aeneid*.])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson