Close X
Attorney Spotlight

What colorful method does Claire Miley use to keep up with the latest healthcare regulations as they relate to proposed transactions? Find out more>

Search

Close X

Experience

Search our Experience

Experience Spotlight

On December 1, 2016, Parker Hannifin Corporation and CLARCOR Inc. announced that the companies have entered into a definitive agreement under which Parker will acquire CLARCOR for approximately $4.3 billion in cash, including the assumption of net debt. The transaction has been unanimously approved by the board of directors of each company. Upon closing of the transaction, expected to be completed by or during the first quarter of Parker’s fiscal year 2018, CLARCOR will be combined with Parker’s Filtration Group to form a leading and diverse global filtration business. Bass, Berry & Sims has served CLARCOR as primary corporate and securities counsel for 10 years and served as lead counsel on this transaction. Read more here.

CLARCOR
Close X

Thought Leadership

Enter your search terms in the relevant box(es) below to search for specific Thought Leadership.
To see a recent listing of Thought Leadership, click the blue Search button below.

Thought Leadership Spotlight

Securities Law Exchange BlogSecurities Law Exchange blog offers insight on the latest legal and regulatory developments affecting publicly traded companies. It focuses on a wide variety of topics including regulation and reporting updates, public company advisory topics, IPO readiness and exchange updates including IPO announcements, M&A trends and deal news.

Read More >

Labor Talk Blog: Attorney General Says "Guns in Trunks" Legislation Does Not Alter "At-Will" Status of Employees

Publications

June 3, 2013

Tennessee employers, according to the Tennessee Attorney General, can still terminate employees for violating a "no weapons" policy, despite the new "guns in trunks" legislation due to take effect July 1, 2013. In his opinion letter, Attorney General Robert Cooper answers "yes" to a hot topic of conversation among employers – and their attorneys – in the wake of the bill's passage – Can an employer still terminate an employee who brings a weapon onto the employer's property in violation of the employer's policies?

We supplement here that "yes" with a word of caution.

Attorney General Cooper explains that the new "guns in trunks" legislation amends only the Tennessee law governing criminal offenses. He explains that the legislation "does not address and thus has no impact on the employment relationship between an employer and an employee." Op. Tenn. Att'y Gen. No. 13-41 (May 28, 2013). The opinion letter states that employers often are permitted to establish policies that restrict otherwise lawful activities and that the plain and unambiguous language of the new provision does not address the employment relationship.

However, Tennessee courts have long recognized a public policy exception to the at-will employment doctrine. That exception provides that employees may not be terminated for exercising a statutory or constitutional right or for any other reason that violates a clear public policy of the state of Tennessee as evidenced by unambiguous constitutional, statutory, or regulatory provision. Crews v. Buckman Labs. Int’l, 78 S.W.3d 852, 858 (Tenn. 2002) (quoting Stein v. Davidson Hotel Co., 945 S.W.2d 714, 716-17 (Tenn. 1997)). Thus, a Court could consider the new criminal statute as an unambiguous statutory provision that shows a clear public policy of the state to allow permitted gun owners to transport firearms in their vehicles, even onto an employer's premises.

It is this tension that causes us to urge Tennessee employers to proceed with caution. The Attorney General's (AG) opinion letter is helpful to employers but does not address this long-standing public policy exception to Tennessee's employment-at-will rule. Plus, while helpful, the AG opinion letter does not have the force of law.

A few takeaways for Tennessee employers:

  1. We would not suggest that an employer would want to be the test case.
  2. The AG opinion, while helpful, is not the final say and a Court could use the new "guns in trunks" legislation to articulate a recognized public policy exception to the employment-at-will rule.
  3. If faced with a possible discipline issue on a weapons violation, seek legal counsel as to whether there exists other sound footing, not inconsistent with the new law, for the contemplated termination.
  4. The AG opinion does clarify that leased, rented, and borrowed vehicles are not included within the protection of the new "guns in trunks" law. In accordance with the plain language of the statute, permit holders may only transport firearms and ammunition in their privately-owned vehicles.
  5. The AG opinion also clarifies that there is no "grace period" from the ordinary observation restriction that would allow a permit-holder to transfer a weapon from one location to another such that the weapon could be observed by a security camera. The weapon must be kept from ordinary observation at all times.
  6. The AG also clarified that the new law's protection extends to both a firearm and firearm ammunition.
  7. What to expect in light of the opinion letter:
    • Efforts in the legislature to clarify the effect of the legislation on the employment relationship; and
    • Caution on the part of employers to avoid becoming the test case.

Related Professionals

Related Services

Notice

Visiting, or interacting with, this website does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Although we are always interested in hearing from visitors to our website, we cannot accept representation on a new matter from either existing clients or new clients until we know that we do not have a conflict of interest that would prevent us from doing so. Therefore, please do not send us any information about any new matter that may involve a potential legal representation until we have confirmed that a conflict of interest does not exist and we have expressly agreed in writing to the representation. Until there is such an agreement, we will not be deemed to have given you any advice, any information you send may not be deemed privileged and confidential, and we may be able to represent adverse parties.