Need Advice ASAP!

[CorpSec]

I would consult with an attorney specializing in employment law. I would also keep that suspension letter in a nice, safe place.

I know that our big mall out here provides vests for their officers even though they are not armed. When I worked hospital security, I wore one.

If you got an attorney involved, I am guessing that their tune might change. These guys are being foolish and it seems that they are in some kind of a pi$$ing match with you.

[Charger]

Be sure to keep us posted msofin!

I'm also very curious to see what OSHA decides on this. If OSHA finds in your favor, (fingers crossed.. ) this may have far-reaching implications as others have said. Keep us informed!

[Curtis Baillie]

To assist you in your quest I suggest you perform a crime analysis of your working location. This may - or may not support your interests.

[N. A. Corbier]

I bet there are a ton of employment lawyers licking their chops over a case like this. A consultation is generally free and you can usually get one to agree to a percentage of winnings.

I do not see how it is legal for an employer to not allow you to passively protect yourself. They didn't even know you were wearing it until they dragged you into the back.

It would be like the boss telling you you could not wear latex gloves at a medical because it might give the mall patrons the idea that you think they are disease carriers.

OSHA requires that employers provide Personal Protective Equipment (latex gloves) if the employee's job duties includes an occupational risk of exposure to a hazard.

Keep in mind, if your job duties include an occupational risk of exposure to bloodborne pathogens, there are two courses by law you must be given.

The vest is the same gimmick. If there is an occupational hazard of being shot and killed, then the security firm is required by OSHA to start handing out 600 dollar vests. If the company can be proven to acknowledge this hazard, then its no longer, "Can I wear a vest," but "You have to give me a vest. On your dime."

[CorpSec]

I bet there are a ton of employment lawyers licking their chops over a case like this. A consultation is generally free and you can usually get one to agree to a percentage of winnings.

I do not see how it is legal for an employer to not allow you to passively protect yourself. They didn't even know you were wearing it until they dragged you into the back.

It would be like the boss telling you you could not wear latex gloves at a medical because it might give the mall patrons the idea that you think they are disease carriers.

[N. A. Corbier]

I want to know how this OSHA angle turns out. Keep in mind, OSHA has not specifically said that there is an occupational hazard for "security guards and gaming agents" from gunfire and violent attack.

If OSHA rules that you have a right to wear your vest, that would mean that OSHA believes that there is an occupational hazard.

[JSam21]

He kept referring to the vest as an unaproved 'unifrom part'. Specificaly "Only authorized uniform items will be worn while on duty". Would anyone else consider a ballistic vest a uniform item?

I would have several follow up questions to him after this statement. Are underwear/boxers "authorized uniform items"? If so what/which brands are authorized? Are socks authorized? If so what/which brands are allowed?

[Mr. Security]

After the suspension

Obey the rules when you return, but do get another security job.

[Mr. Security]

Sorry

About the suspension. I don't like the way your case was handled and if it were me, I would be suspended too.

Looks like the LT and Security Director left for good reason. I would get another job ASAP.

[msofin]

update

I contacted OSHA this afternoon, since the on duty officer was already on an other line the staff assistant put me through to voicemail. I'm waiting for the officer to get back to me. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[msofin]

Did you receive a copy of the write up? If so; did it mention vest specifically?

Yes, I did. It does specifcally mention "ballistic vest". BUT the section of the procedure and policy manuel I was written up for didn't even cover uniforms or weapons much less a vest!

For the sake of conversation (in a nut shell):

I was approached by the supervisor last night. He asked me if I ws wearing the vest, I just said "no, I hve a backbrace on.". He than asked me if I would come to the security office and take my shirt off for him so he could see (if I was wearing it)! After a second attempt in the breakroom, the ops manager suspended me.

[rgunguy]

Sounds like political correctness

I agree with Sgt. Newbie. If You cant see it then why is it an issue? Would they prohibit you from wearing green underwear too?

[Mr. Chaple]

Did you receive a copy of the write up? If so; did it mention vest specifically?

[msofin]

First off, we need to know if this is a concealed vest or not, since that hasn't been answered. If we're talking about an over-the-shirt tactical vest, then I don't see any plausible reason for you to be wearing it in a shopping mall setting.. Other than to appear more like a "mall ninja"

If we're talking about a standard concealed vest, then I would find a new site or job. NO company will tell me I can't wear a vest to protect myself while I'm in uniform, and if one did I'd hand them my two week notice on the spot. My safety is more important to me than their profit margins or concerns about appearing to be "armed". Incidentally, you might inform that supervisor that a vest has nothing to do with being armed. I'm a firm believer that ANYONE who wears a uniform SHOULD wear a vest under it, because to the so-called 'bad element' out there that uniform makes you a big target, whether you're wearing a gun or not.

//rant.

"mall ninja"- haha...thats great!

it is a concealed vest (second chance IIIA). He didn't care that I said the vest has nothing to do with being armed. He keeps sayinng he's ex LE, wouldn't he know that? One of my co-workers touched my back, I believe that is the only way they found out. I received a write up for this 'infraction'. I was verbally reprimanded when I asked if there was a policy that specifically stated 'ballistic vest'. He kept referring to the vest as an unaproved 'unifrom part'. Specificaly "Only authorized uniform items will be worn while on duty". Would anyone else consider a ballistic vest a uniform item?

Let's not forget that a ballistic vest provides some degree of protection to all blunt trauma not just bullets. I know one of second chance's saves was an S.O. who hit at a high rate of speed while driving home late at night from work.

[Mr. Chaple]

Ask him if he is willing to sign and date a typed letter forbidding you from wearing it.