03-20-2015, 01:22 PM
^ Interesting, F.U.
As a defense attorney and NRA member, the boss is certainly getting some good exposure to drum up business and espouse his political beliefs. That's kinda smart marketing strategy, IMO.
What's kinda dumb about it, IMO, is taking the associated Human Resources and Liability risks. Financial incentives and rewards for gun-carriers on-the-job as an employment policy could easily be viewed by a labor judge as discriminating against those employees (like the receptionist) who choose to exercise their rights not to pack at work. Bonuses are typically handed out based on achieving or exceeding performance goals, not exercising a right. And, if any employee shot himself or another on the job and was getting paid for packing, I could see the boss possibly being held at least partially responsible in civil or criminal court.
If the employees like guns or feel more safe with guns, why would they need to get paid to carry them? Why wouldn't the boss simply make his commitment to carry rights very clear and let the employees know that he supports their right to do so while they're on his clock? Why bribe them? Maybe the media/marketing exposure is worth it for him. Or, he's just of the "more guns, the better!" ilk and is looking to motivate his employees who don't wanna carry guns to carry them anyway -- just for the money. Or, he gets incentive from the NRA. Or, a combination. IDK.
Anyway, I'd feel the same way and ask the same questions about a politically passionate Democrat employer paying his/her employees a bonus to go to the polls and exercise their rights to vote during work time. Or, a clinic financially rewarding its female employees to choose abortion over the pill and do interviews about it in order to drum up business and reinforce the clinic's and its cients' legal rights to terminate pregnancies.
In any case, if the employees wanna do it and the employer wants to take the associated risks (and there's nothing illegal about it), more power to them all.
As a defense attorney and NRA member, the boss is certainly getting some good exposure to drum up business and espouse his political beliefs. That's kinda smart marketing strategy, IMO.
What's kinda dumb about it, IMO, is taking the associated Human Resources and Liability risks. Financial incentives and rewards for gun-carriers on-the-job as an employment policy could easily be viewed by a labor judge as discriminating against those employees (like the receptionist) who choose to exercise their rights not to pack at work. Bonuses are typically handed out based on achieving or exceeding performance goals, not exercising a right. And, if any employee shot himself or another on the job and was getting paid for packing, I could see the boss possibly being held at least partially responsible in civil or criminal court.
If the employees like guns or feel more safe with guns, why would they need to get paid to carry them? Why wouldn't the boss simply make his commitment to carry rights very clear and let the employees know that he supports their right to do so while they're on his clock? Why bribe them? Maybe the media/marketing exposure is worth it for him. Or, he's just of the "more guns, the better!" ilk and is looking to motivate his employees who don't wanna carry guns to carry them anyway -- just for the money. Or, he gets incentive from the NRA. Or, a combination. IDK.
Anyway, I'd feel the same way and ask the same questions about a politically passionate Democrat employer paying his/her employees a bonus to go to the polls and exercise their rights to vote during work time. Or, a clinic financially rewarding its female employees to choose abortion over the pill and do interviews about it in order to drum up business and reinforce the clinic's and its cients' legal rights to terminate pregnancies.
In any case, if the employees wanna do it and the employer wants to take the associated risks (and there's nothing illegal about it), more power to them all.