Disney Employee Suspended After Bringing Gun To Work

[OrlandoMike]

FYI he was terminated today.....

Disney Security Guard Fired After Bringing Gun To Workplace

POSTED: 5:23 pm EDT July 7, 2008


LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. -- A Disney security guard who challenged the company's anti-gun policy has been fired. Eyewitness News broke Edwin Sotomayer's story last week.

Disney considered itself exempt from the state's new law that lets employees bring their guns to work if they're left locked in the car. But Sotomayer told Eyewitness News he'd bring his gun anyway.

Monday, the company fired him for violating company policy by not cooperating with its investigation.
Sotomayer has already hired a lawyer.

Note the part in bold. He was NOT fired for bringing a gun to work!

 

[mitros]

People who start road rage may carry a gun, and people who carry a gun may start road rage. Either way I don't think any law will affect it either way. Lots of hunters carry rifles in their trucks, but most road rage is with handguns. Its the people, not the guns or the laws, and people will be people, both good and bad. I don't think the law will affect anything. I carry a handgun in my car, and I have a bad temper. If guns were banned I'd still carry my gun, and I'd still have a temper.
This is looking more and more like an NRA discussion rather than a Disney discussion.

Well, as they say, guns don't kill people, people kill people.....

 

[DancingBear]

yeah, but the guns sure make it more convenient!

 

[raidermatt]

FYI he was terminated today.....

Disney Security Guard Fired After Bringing Gun To Workplace

...

Monday, the company fired him for violating company policy by not cooperating with its investigation.
Sotomayer has already hired a lawyer.

Note the part in bold. He was NOT fired for bringing a gun to work!

Which means even if Disney's exemption goes away, he might not get his job back.

 

[SurfinTX]

FYI he was terminated today.....

Disney Security Guard Fired After Bringing Gun To Workplace

POSTED: 5:23 pm EDT July 7, 2008


LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. -- A Disney security guard who challenged the company's anti-gun policy has been fired. Eyewitness News broke Edwin Sotomayer's story last week.

Disney considered itself exempt from the state's new law that lets employees bring their guns to work if they're left locked in the car. But Sotomayer told Eyewitness News he'd bring his gun anyway.

Monday, the company fired him for violating company policy by not cooperating with its investigation.
Sotomayer has already hired a lawyer.

Note the part in bold. He was NOT fired for bringing a gun to work!

This is going to be a close one. Most initial rulings on this law are being handled county by county. The law specifically says it is OK for a security guard to keep his own licensed gun in a secure place while employed. The type of buisness is not specified in that section nor does it specify that the employer has a right to regulate that. Disney could have had the police search his vehicle if there is suspected illegal materials inside.

The police would then after the search ask many questions but if all they found was a licensed gun that was secured they wouldn't do much more than ask what the employer what they wanted to do next.

Disney is well within it's rights to fire him but they can not deny him unemployment. Later, if a judge finds that this was a case of wrongful termination it is up to Disney to come up with all the documentation and law that allowed it or they will be issued fines from the state.

Again, the specific provision Disney is trying to use to prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms (secured) is that explosives are the primary buisness of the company, at least that is what the provision says. Is the making, selling and distribution of explosives the primary activity at the parks in Disney?

Anyway, this will first be challenged county by county and rest assured it will go to the Florida Supreme Court to get a final ruling on this. At best this is a very grey area of the law and will take some time to hammer out.

Before we comment on how smart this was it is possible he was already going through channels internaly to see if he could have brought the gun. However, you wait until it's clear you can before doing so...idiot.

 

[CanadianGuy]

He has posted a video on Youtube.

He records the Disney Security VP and his shop steward for the union in the truck.. on his cell phone.

Before the security VP gets in the vehicle, the shop steward admonishes him to "say nothing and do nothing. Be quiet.."

Once in the vehicle, the security VP says "Stop recording you do not have my permission to record in this vehicle" -- he lies and says he's not recording.. just taking pictures

The VP says "Stop taking pictures, you do NOT have my permission to take pictures in my vehicle." - He lies again, leaving the phone recording and putting in his bag on the seat where it is STILL recording away for a few more minutes.

This guy lied twice during an investigation.. and THEN posted PROOF of those lies on the internet the very same day. Note he posted those videos on July 4th.. NOT July 7th, the day he was dismissed.

Sorry.. 3 strikes.

In the end, he was fired for interfering with or not cooperating with an investigation. NOT for having the gun.

But even further, he took video in a backstage area (the vehicle, the place the vehicle arrived to) without permission ... in fact he had the exact REVERSE of permission ... and unauthorized CM photography or video backstage is a fireable offense right there.

So Disney has other grounds to dismiss the guy... in fact, three different reasons for dismissal..

1. Gun situation
2. Not cooperating/Interfering with the investigation
3. Unauthorized backstage videos posted online

He's just not very bright for doing that I gotta say *IF* I was a gun advocate, I don't know if I'd pick this guy as a spokesman. As a Disney security employee, he would be WELL AWARE of items # 2 and # 3 and how they could affect his employment.

If he was trying to make a point, he's just greatly muddied up any case a lawyer could bring on his behalf and in so doing, given Disney a second and third out for his dismissal. So even if he wins on the gun count, he's still unemployed.

Knox

Link to Video # 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1V7hVHZ0DU

Link to Video # 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKuLlUVyEFQ

 

[gelebean]

The CM obviously wanted to be caught.

To me just stinks of another sue and try to get rich scheme, but "really" fighting for the rights of all gun carrying citizens.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[Paging Tom Morrow]

Once in the vehicle, the security VP says "Stop recording you do not have my permission to record in this vehicle" -- he lies and says he's not recording.. just taking pictures

The VP says "Stop taking pictures, you do NOT have my permission to take pictures in my vehicle." - He lies again, leaving the phone recording and putting in his bag on the seat where it is STILL recording away for a few more minutes

I just watched the video twice. Nowhere does he lie. He states he is taking pictures, which is true as video taken on a cell phone is simply a bunch of pictures taken together at a very close time and then played in a streaming method.

After the supervisor asks him to stop taking pictures, he doesn't respond to that request, so no lie there either.

He does not need permission to take pictures (or video) in the vehicle as there should be no expectation of privacy when in a company vehicle. I'd be willing to bet that Disney even states that there should be no expectation of privacy when at work (email, web usage, company vehicles, offices, etc.) to cover themselves from liability in their employee handbooks.

In general, most video recordings are legal in the U.S. with or without consent. Laws do exist regarding "Invasion of Privacy" which deals with the area of expected privacy. These include areas such as bathrooms, locker rooms, changing/dressing rooms, bedrooms and other areas where a person should expect a high level of personal privacy.

 

[MassJester]

I just watched the video twice. Nowhere does he lie. He states he is taking pictures, which is true as video taken on a cell phone is simply a bunch of pictures taken together at a very close time and then played in a streaming method.

After the supervisor asks him to stop taking pictures, he doesn't respond to that request, so no lie there either.

He does not need permission to take pictures (or video) in the vehicle as there should be no expectation of privacy when in a company vehicle. I'd be willing to bet that Disney even states that there should be no expectation of privacy when at work (email, web usage, company vehicles, offices, etc.) to cover themselves from liability in their employee handbooks.

In general, most video recordings are legal in the U.S. with or without consent. Laws do exist regarding "Invasion of Privacy" which deals with the area of expected privacy. These include areas such as bathrooms, locker rooms, changing/dressing rooms, bedrooms and other areas where a person should expect a high level of personal privacy.

Two problems:
1) The failure to follow instructions is insubordination, whether he responds verbally or not -- most all organizations consider that a termination offense.
2) The right to infringe on privacy does not belong to the line employee, but rather to the company. He has no right to videotape/photograph/record conversations with management. The list of companies that would fire him for that alone would pretty much consume the yellow pages--never mind how they would react to his publishing it on the web.

This guy wote his own name on the "fire me" list--Disney simply oblidged him.

 

[CanadianGuy]

Wow.. in that case.. all those Disney CM's fired for backstage photography or video ... are due their jobs back... that'd be a sizeable class action.. I wanna piece of that lawfirm that takes that one.

And, in the video, clearly he DOES lie.. he says, "I'm not filming.. " -- say what you want.. but video with sound is not 'just taking pictures'. in the sense that was intended by the comments made.

And after being told that's not allowed either, he fiddles with the phone.. and puts in the backpack to convey the impression he's not 'taking pictures' ...

Whatever. He's toast. I'll eat a paper printout of this thread if he gets his job back.

Knox

 

[MassJester]

In general, most video recordings are legal in the U.S. with or without consent. Laws do exist regarding "Invasion of Privacy" which deals with the area of expected privacy. These include areas such as bathrooms, locker rooms, changing/dressing rooms, bedrooms and other areas where a person should expect a high level of personal privacy.

However, recordings that include voice require all party consent under Florida law. So a video recording might be legal, but a video recording that captures voice would not.

 

[MassJester]

Whatever. He's toast. I'll eat a paper printout of this thread if he gets his job back.

Knox

Hmmmmm, well then just for the pure entertainment value we should:
a) substantially increase the length of this thread
b) lobby WDW to re-employ the stooge



Who loves ya Knox?

 

[CanadianGuy]

I'll go one step further ... based on what I've learned about this...

- Barring some SHOCKING revelation... say.. 'he was a whistleblower who managed to catch the VP of Security as a mafia member' or something equally unlikely yet heroic --

If he gets his job back.. within 12 months... I'll eat a paper print out of this thread and video record it (or "film it" if you prefer) with sound... and post it on YouTube, along with my sincere apologies to the employee in question.

Anyone willing to take the other side of that bet? With apologies to me? Hmmm?

Knox

PS> Scuttlebutt on the street in Orlando says this 'union member' cost his union about $10,000 forcing an unnecessary re-election because he wanted to be president of the union a few years back. He lost... and the union lost too... a big bunch of money in the process. Not sure how much effort they'll put into this in light of my previous post... with about three reasons for dismissal, and this little tidbit is just like dessert.

 

[safetymom]

I am listening to something on TV about this. How many CM parking lots are 3 miles away from their workplace? The representative and TV anchor kept stressing this point why they should be allowed to carry guns.

Knox, I don't think you will be eating the paper version of this thread!!!!

 

[SelfEmployedDebtFree]

I just want to see someone eat some paper.

 

[SelfEmployedDebtFree]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asdsvfDI8pg

PS that was a joke.

 

[manning]

He has posted a video on Youtube.

The VP says "Stop taking pictures, you do NOT have my permission to take pictures in my vehicle." - He lies again, leaving the phone recording and putting in his bag on the seat where it is STILL recording away for a few more minutes.

In our state it is a felony to do this. And you don't get a suspended sentence, you do time.

 

[PrincessKsMom]

I carry a handgun in my car, and I have a bad temper. If guns were banned I'd still carry my gun, and I'd still have a temper.

This really scares me. You know you have a bad temper, but continue to carry a gun? Also, the idea that you are above the law and would still carry a gun, even if it was against the law?

 

[SelfEmployedDebtFree]

This really scares me. You know you have a bad temper, but continue to carry a gun? Also, the idea that you are above the law and would still carry a gun, even if it was against the law?

As long as your not dialing a number instead of driving, you have nothing to fear. What SCARES me is the soccer moms trying to drive those HUGE SUVs while juggling 2 fighting kids, a cup of coffee, 3 text messages, and an email while driving down the road.
Nothing against SUVs, but When you are driving, EVERYTHING should STOP except for your driving. This means ALL emotional phone calls, all calls that avoid extra fingers and scanning your cellphone for numbers, all emails, all texts, all fast food, all makeup applications, etc. I have a temper because people all around me are doing STUPID things rather than trying to CONCENTRATE on their driving!!! I get sick and tired of having to swerve to avoid an accident from some brainless idiot who is doing EVERYTHING BUT concentrating on their driving.


Above the law??? The 2nd amendment guarantees my right to defend myself with a firearm. ANY law created will violate my 2nd amendment. THAT would anger me.

 

[MassJester]

It is beyond me why folks in other countries regard us a nation of loud, gun-loving freaks.