[Luis Gonzalez]

"...if a vehicle is searched, their must be probable cause and only the employer's property is to be considered, nothing else."

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?

[UpAllNight]

--What are you going to do at that point?--

You have to ask after all the reponses on this thread? Why of course, you pull out your SKS and shoot the minimum wage, 59 year old guard.

[spunkets]

" 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?"

You mean what have I done on behalf of others. I pointed out, that it was not their vehicle and they no right to search it, and made it clear, that the rest of the crew and most of the management would all walk if they pressed the matter. In some cases, it was sufficient to say, that I would walk.

None of that means the employer couldn't fire anyone for no cause. Nor does it mean the employer had justification to violate the employee's property right. What it does mean, is that the employee has a right to seek govm't action, to remedy the situation, regardless of whether the remedy already specifically exists, or must be sought from a civil, or legislative action.