Weapons in the Workplace

Federal Judge Sides with SHRM in OK Gun Case

SHRM's Weapons in the Workplace position has received a big boost from the courts. In a long-awaited decision, a federal judge of the U.S. District Court in Oklahoma sided with SHRM in finding that a workplace weapons bill passed by the Oklahoma legislature in 2004 (and amended in 2005), which prohibits employers from establishing policies banning employees from bringing weapons onto company property, is pre-empted by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act's (OSHA) 'general duty' clause.

SHRM had filed a "friend of the court" brief in this Oklahoma case, known officially as ConocoPhillips v. Henry, et al.

Judge Terry Kern, in his 93-page opinion and order, wrote:

"The Court concludes the Amendments [the Oklahoma weapons laws] conflict with and are preempted by the OSH Act, which requires employers to abate hazards in their workplaces that could lead to death or serious bodily harm and which encourages employers to prevent gun-related workplace injuries. The Amendments criminally prohibit an effective method of reducing gun-related workplace injuries and cannot coexist with federal obligations and objectives."

At press time, it is unclear what impact (if any) the Oklahoma ruling might have on similar laws passed in Kentucky, Alaska, Minnesota, and most recently in Kansas. SHRM expects this decision will be appealed. In the meantime, Oklahoma businesses are free to enforce their own workplace policies regarding weapons on company property. SHRM's position throughout this debate has been that individual employers should have the freedom to decide what policies best fit their work establishments.