Canon USA demands employees reveal CHL or be terminated

[stevemis]

Well, for what it's worth: My last Canon product (and the only one left in the house, I suspect) was a flatbed scanner. I had it about a year, scanned maybe 15 or 20 items, and it died. It hit the trash bin last month.

I don't believe there's enough evidence for a boycott at this point. If this turns out to be true, I'll never buy another Canon product again.. I think we're jumping the gun (no pun intended) a little. Let's get confirmation from someone, folks.

Steve

 

[patentmike]

Relax F4etc in the midwest. This is a Texas bill, get your own. It looks like a great start. It puts the C back into CHL.

Of course, if you get attacked while you're off work and defend yourself, you will get fired - unless you were carrying illegally.
Geniuses. I'll bet they make really well thought-out cameras.

 

[F4GIB]

Relax F4etc in the midwest. This is a Texas bill, get your own.

1. I went to high school in Abilene, TEXAS.

2. We've had carry permit CONFIDENTIALITY where I live since 1974.

3. The new bill in Texas badly needs amendment.

 

[MechAg94]

My understanding is that newspapers already tried to get the CHL list, but the DPS told them they could not get the list, but had to ask for specific names one at a time. We still need some basic protection for this though.

Not sure about Cannon. I got the email alert from the TSRA also. I would be curious if it is the whole company or one location. The repercussions of their policy would depend on if you could prove that was the specific reason for being terminated or not hired. The simple possession of a CHL shouldn't mean anything. If they want to limit carry privileges on their property, that would be fine to me. They just need to understand that deranged psychopathic murderers who like the idea of assassinating upper management are not the type of people to follow rules when the time comes to do their deed.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

In addition to the TSRA alert and a Texas Senator, we also have TSRA quoting a Canon employment manual. Canon states they have 11,000 employees on their website, so it shouldn't be impossible to verify that.

Actually, the TSRA piece doesn't "quote" a Canon employment manual, it reports that Canon's policy is xxx. The only way they could "quote" the manual would be to reproduce the actual language of the manual in quotation marks, and they don't do that.

I'm with the group that says "Show me where Canon says that." I can't say it's not so, but I have seen nothing so far to convince me that it is so.

 

[vito]

ELZA: After you check with Canon, I hope you update this thread. I too have been a Canon camera user for many years, but would want to voice my anger at them and tell them I would never buy another of their products if in fact, they so blatantly discriminate against LEGAL permit holders.

 

[Robert Hairless]

What difference does it make whether it's true? Let's boycott Canon anyway.

A few days ago we were boycotting Target Stores because a store manager didn't allow uniformed marines into its stores. As things turned out, that story was wrong. The store manager didn't want recruiters to recruit in his store.

So who cares whether it's true?

 

[longeyes]

We started losing the Constitution when the corporations arose. They comprise a culture essentially inimical to the Constitution because they are hierarchical in nature, modern feudal states, mini-governments with no allegiance except to the bottom-line. What good are the protections of the individual embodied in the Bill of Rights if corporations can, de facto, on economic grounds pre-empt those rights?

 

[wingman]

What good are the protections of the individual embodied in the Bill of Rights if corporations can, de facto, on economic grounds pre-empt those rights?\QUOTE]

Bingo!!!, the selling of America continues.

 

[XLMiguel]

There's a good article in this week's BusinessWeek about dealing with problem employees. The general drift was that "at will" employment isn't as simple as it sounds, i.e. darn near anyone can sue for wrongful discharge. While the employer can control their own preimises regarding firearms possession, and IANAL, but I suspect that firing someone for simply having a CHL wouldn't fly too far, especially in TX.

At any rate, that D-40 is looking a lot better than a Rebel XTi . . .

 

[Art Eatman]

Rather than worrying about TSRA's accuracy, why not just email Canon and ask?

TSRA has been around for a long time. It has had credibility with the Texas Legislature for decades. It's respected because efforts are made to verify the alleged facts before making claims.

Regardless, ask Canon. See just exactly what the policy is.

Art

 

[Car Knocker]

why not just email Canon and ask?

Bartholomew Roberts, in the original post, said he would contact Canon - I'm awaiting Canon's reply to his inquiry.

 

[Chad]

It was asked earlier if Canon prohibited it's employees from having a CHL or just threatened them if the company wasn't informed.
Either policy is reprehensible, but the former would be more so.

 

[Soybomb]

I would like to see a scan of the employee manual. Surely a canon employee has access to a scanner.

 

[MechAg94]

If it is like my company, the employee manual is not printed, it is on their internal website.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

From Canon online:

Thank you for contacting Canon product support.

Unfortunately, we here at the Care Center located in South East Virginia
have no knowledge of the policy you refer to. I would suggest writing a
letter to Canon USA's Corporate Headquarters in Lake Success New York.
They would be better suited for addressing your concerns. Their address
information is as follows:

Canon U.S.A., Inc.
One Canon Plaza
Lake Success, NY 11042

Please do not attempt to send an E-mail to them or to contact them by
telephone as we handle all incoming inquiries for these channels. Your
request must be sent in writing to the address I provided.

I apologize for any inconvenience this causes you. Please let us know
if we can be of any further assistance.

 

[K3]

And that's the problem with CCW as we have it. There's a list. List = bad.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Wow, so it is NOT a Canon USA issue/policy. It may be going on in Irving, but not as a matter of being the policy of the Canon USA company.

It is rather amusing to see how easily folks are willing to boycott the entire company and make claims as to foreign values when in fact this is apparently a local issue, possibly of a lone manager, assuming it even exists at all.

As I posted previously, I don't see how Canon can get this information under the open records act. Given that CHL information is protected by law, then there would be a decision that goes through Greg Abbott's office and that apparently has not happened yet.

If Canon Irving is threatening such a practice, it is apparently doing so outside of the scope of Canon USA and apparently as something of a ploy that is not based in reality.

 

[Green Lantern]

Fine then - Unless TSRA makes a habit out of lying, I say contact Canon and demand that they look into the situation in Irving!

 

[LubeckTech]

The above reply from Cannon neither confirms or denies the company policy. It makes no effort to clairify the policy and every effort to discourage you from a fast, simple answer to the question. If they wanted you to know they would check into the matter and give a straight forward explaination promptly in a return email. It appears they don't want you to know and they make no effort to take a posative stand to support the right to keep and bear arms but it would tick off the liberals if they did. It would be interesting for TSRA to tell us how and where they obtained this information from the company manual I believe them to be accurate as if they are worng Cannon USA could tgake legal action against them.

 

[Cellar Dweller]

Where are all the apologists?

You know, the ones that trump "employer's/corporation's rights" as the be-all end-all.

[sarcasm] After all, you can choose to get a CHL (if the article is true) or you can choose to work for Canon, that's the way a free market works, you don't like it go work somewhere else. [/sarcasm]

Apparently it's only OK for the government to not disarm you, but corporations, condo/homeowners associations, neighbors, etc. have the "right" to disarm...and they can and should use government agents and agencies to enforce their "rights." (In this case, Texas Department of Public Safety)

 

[BryanP]

Apparently it's only OK for the government to not disarm you, but corporations, condo/homeowners associations, neighbors, etc.

Well, yeah.

You see, I don't have any CHOICE about doing business with the government. I do have a choice about doing business with or being employed by Canon.


I own a very nice Canon digital camera. If this turns out to be an accurate report then it will likely be the last Canon product I purchase. I can vote with my dollars with a private company with no fear of repercussions. Oddly enough, if I disagree with current government policy I can't protest by refusing to pay my taxes.

Choice. That's the key.

 

[BryanP]

If it is like my company, the employee manual is not printed, it is on their internal website.

Even easier. "Print" the page to a PDF file, or take a screen capture of the appropriate page and email it out.

 

[Soybomb]

[sarcasm] After all, you can choose to get a CHL (if the article is true) or you can choose to work for Canon, that's the way a free market works, you don't like it go work somewhere else. [/sarcasm]

I guess I don't get the problem with that. People are quick to say they want the government to butt out of their personal matters, but when it comes to something that would benefit them they're all for government involvement. Why not just find a new job if you don't like company policy?

 

[bogie]

If this was a decision that some local manager made, then corporate needs to hear about it just as much as if it was a headquarters decision.

I'm not going to be buying or recommending Canon stuff until they clear it up. And I've specced a LOT of high end stuff...