"Not only are you making up words, now you're making up laws."
No. When the employer can provide a title to the vehicle, that has their name on it, then they can claim sovereignty over the interior of the vehicle.
" Post the law to back that restriction up."
You're an expert in "property rights". Look it up.
Re: "Sovereignty of the vehicle's interior belongs solely to the employee."
"You're making a case for the right to steal from your employer"
Ridiculous! Whose name appears on the title?
" Sovereignty to the contents of the land belongs solely to the person who owns it,"
The contents of the land? I suppose you think an employer can act in a negligent fashion, with regards to his employee's health and safety? It's rather clear that you think an employer can violate any right of the employee, as they see fit to do so. That's not the case.
"There is a sign that advices you that in order for your vehicle to enter the property, you must agree to a search by the security guards, and that it will be searched again on the way out."
The employer has the right to maintain a loss prevention program which is reasonable. I'll not consider those cases where the loss prevention reasonably includes the possibility of a violent assault, because of the nature of the business. That doesn't include Post Offices.
Otherwise, if a vehicle is searched, their must be probable cause and only the employer's property is to be considered, nothing else.
---It's rather clear that you think an employer can violate any right of the employee, as they see fit to do so. That's not the case. --
It is really in bad taste to make up things in a vain attempt at slurring them.
--Otherwise, if a vehicle is searched, their must be probable cause and only the employer's property is to be considered, nothing else.--
These issues all started when some guys took their guns out of their trunks in the parking lot. So drop the act about 'being secured in the trunk'.
So your argument is that if you can manage to get your employer's property in your vehicle parked on his property, your employer has lost his right to recover his property because he can't search your vehicle?
Absurd.
When you can provide a title to the lands and structures to that property, then you can make the rules on it, until that point, your access to it is controlled by the owner.
No one is forcing an employee to accept a job where they feel that their rights are being violated, or that their life is in danger as a result of the workplace policies, so there are no rights violations here. If you are not in agreement on the way a property owner exercises their rights, then don't enter their property...you don't have a right to be on it to begin with.
You are demanding a non-existent right...the right to be on someone else's property on your terms and against theirs.
You simply don't have that right.
You continue to confuse restrictions on government with restrictions on individuals.
You don't have to agree to allow your employer to search your vehicle on the way into their property at all, then again, your employer can deny you access to their property if they don't get to search your vehicle.
Here's how that plays out:
Employer: Hello, I need you to open your trunk and so that I can search for guns before you access my parking lot, as you may recall allowing me to search your vehicle on the way and out of the property is a condition of employment.
You: No, you can't search my car.
Employer: Then you can't enter the property.
What are you going to do at that point?