Based on AlaskanInTexas' original question, let’s completely ignore for a moment the issue of a company’s ability to terminate and look only at what is and is not an offense under the law (i.e., criminal trespass by a CHL carrying a concealed handgun, a Class A misdemeanor). Simple “awareness” of a company no-guns policy does not come into play. In large part, that’s because proving “awareness” in and of itself is a difficult thing to do.
That’s why §30.06 of the Penal Code is so explicit. To be in violation, you must be carrying under authority of your CHL on the property of another without consent, and you must have received effective notice.
That notice must be given by the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act on the owner’s behalf. There are only two forms of notice that are considered valid. First, the property owner or someone acting on the owner’s behalf may tell you, orally, that you cannot carry a concealed handgun on the property. Second, the property owner or someone acting on the owner’s behalf may post a sign or give you a card or other document—including an employee policy statement—that includes language identical to that shown in PC §30.06(3)(A). If it is a sign posted on the property, it must meet other requirements, including being both in English and Spanish, appearing in contrasting colors and block letters at least one-inch high, and being displayed in a conspicuous manner.
There are two types of communication referenced in Chapter 30 of the Penal Code:
oral and
written. The word “verbal” does not appear anywhere in Chapter 30, but when you read discussions here about PC §30.06, almost everyone uses “verbal.” It’s kind of interesting that when, once in a while, someone notes the distinction between “verbal” and “oral” that it’s pretty much dismissed, but let somebody write “clip” instead of “magazine” and he’s rapidly corrected almost every time.
The distinction among “oral,” “written,” and “verbal” is far more important than that between “clip” and “magazine.” It’s more important because that’s the way the law is written.
“Verbal” means “
of, in, or pertaining to words.” Both oral and written language is verbal. “Oral” means “
uttered through the mouth; spoken.”
A person in authority over the property can tell you, orally, that you cannot carry, and that’s good enough for the law. You’ve been given effective notice; there is no requirement that any particular language be used.
For example, if an HR representative, acting on behalf of the company that owns the property, tells you orally during your indoctrination meeting that firearms are forbidden, then you have been given effective notice and are guilty of a Class A misdemeanor if you carry.
If your co-worker John Smith, who sits one cubicle over, says to you at the coffee machine one day, “You know, the company has a policy against carrying guns, CHL or no,” that is not effective notice because John Smith is not a person in authority acting on behalf of the property owner. The OP did not give effective notice to the two bosses in the scenario he described because he is not in a position to give effective oral notice to anyone (at least, I’m making the assumption that he is not).
If the notice is given in writing, to be effective it must read,
exactly: “Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun.”
So to put this one to bed, a no-gun policy written in an employee handbook is not effective notice under PC §30.06 unless it includes the identical language shown in the Penal Code.
If the employee handbook does not use the exact language from PC §30.06 can you still be fired? Sure you can. Can you be convicted of a Class A misdemeanor based on that employee handbook as notification? Nope.
(Of course, IANAL, so never trust anything from me that looks like legal advice. Always do your own research.
)