Confused, Seeking Opinions

[Jericho 28]

Greetings All!

A bit of background about me and my situation. My fiance and I were given a host of poor information from an attorney that was recommended to us. Luckily, we found VJ and asked a few questions and figured that much out. Fast forward nearly a year, and now I am the one working outside the U.S., and she has a great new job in the U.S., and a work permit. Which brings me to the point of this post.

My fiance got a job heading the HR department for a small research company. Three months into the job, the company is bought out by a bigger company and has decided to keep all the employees in place and focus on integrating the parent company's infrastructure and policies. After reviewing the company policies, the parent company sent my fiance a list of changes to the current HR policy, one of which was the banning of carrying firearms either open or concealed while on company property. They instituted the change because their insurance company would decrease their rates if they did.

When the change in policy was first announced, there was some resistance, but in the end, they relented, or so they said. The TPC 30.06 signage was posted throughout the research campus as well as the parking lot and security gate. Within four hours, my fiance had received two dozen complaints from employees regarding 8 workers continuing to carry. She sent the 8 people an email reminding them of the policy and that violation of it could be grounds for termination. The next day, she received several more complaints about 5 people who continued to carry. She emailed them again and warned that if they did indeed have weapons, they were to go home and secure them at home or be terminated. One of the people accused of carrying made an off handed comment that she'd "have to pry it from his cold, dead hands", which she then called me immediately, scared that she was being threatened. She had planned on issuing a company wide email reiterating the company policy and follow that up with a call to law enforcement to deal with those who continued to carry.

We both grew up around guns, so it's not a matter of being shocked by the mere sight of a gun. It's a matter of appropriateness in the workplace as I see it. It's not an unsafe place to work, the parent company, when they first started making changes made several security changes. The minimum wage security guards were replaced with much higher trained security, and several security measures within the building were installed.

I'm asking for thoughts or opinions on how she should move forward with this. She doesn't want to fire the people in question as they are exceptional (but odd) employees. I have been working outside the U.S. (Mexico and the Netherlands) for the past 4 years and I find that I am unable to reconcile some of the opinions expressed to her.

[TBoneTX 45,266]

Just to clarify: You're the male USC, working chiefly out of the U.S.; she's a Mexican national, working in the U.S. with a work permit; you're not married or actively pursuing a visa path. All correct?

To the issues:

"Pry it from his cold, dead hands" is a common expression of support for the Second Amendment against efforts by the Federal government and others to take away Constitutional rights, and it's almost certainly not a personal threat.

Who is the "they" in "they relented, or so they said"?

Much depends upon how the parent company intends to enforce its no-carry policy. What are the stated penalties in the parent company's Employee Handbook? Was each employee from the acquired company given a copy of the parent company's Employee Handbook and required to sign an acknowledgment that their continued employment depends upon their adherence to the new policies?

It sounds as though this wasn't done, if your statement of "the parent company sent my fiancee a list of changes to the current HR policy" is the complete account of what happened.

When companies are acquired or merged, the corporate cultures (including infrastructure and policies) need to be integrated, or there will be friction. The volume of complaints and the continuing resistance from existing employees indicates that the new parent company perhaps performed nothing but an "overlay" of its own policies. Were meetings of the acquired employees and the new management held, to explain any of the changes? It sounds as though none were, and the parent company is thinking that its policies & procedures can simply be "imposed" with no consideration of corporate culture-clash. Are engineers or accountants in primary charge of the parent company?

This is not easy for your fiancee. More details are needed, but it sounds as though the parent company has deficiencies in its own management that caused it to drop the ball and completely mishandle key parts of the acquisition.

I recommend these actions first:

1. Your fiancee should send a companywide e-mail to reiterate the new corporate policy, but not -- under any circumstances -- threaten termination or to call law enforcement. Either threat would result in dissent and a meltdown in attitude worse than what has already occurred. She should also not fire any of the resisting employees at this time, for the sole reason of continuing to carry. The e-mail should be an interim action until the next steps can be fulfilled.

2. Your fiancee must petition the HR chief (or CEO, or BoD) of the parent company for an Employee Handbook -- existing or written as a team effort -- as a priority. The reasoning is that of above: differences in company cultures have been ignored or glossed over, and some very strong issues affecting integration need to be dealt with after the fact. The parent company's initial failure to consider these elements amidst the hustle & bustle of financial considerations and regulatory concerns, etc., is understandable to some measure but can be ignored for not one day longer.

3. Before #2 above, or at the same time, your fiancee should consult her old company's in-house attorney (if there is one) or the parent company's in-house attorney (if he/she is trustworthy) to find out the applicable state laws & statutes that may apply. Barring this, your fiancee should spare no expense in consulting an outside HR attorney who also (and this is crucial) has experience with mergers & acquisitions.

These are merely general recommendations in lieu of more details from you. From the sound of it, your fiancee has been put in a very tight place by a parent company that failed to consider some crucial tangible (Employee Handbook) and intangible (corporate culture-clash) aspects of a merger/acquisition. It is up to the parent company to perceive the urgency (with your fiancee's help) and to take substantive action as a very top priority.

(VJ Organizer hat on)

*** Thread transferred from Moving Here forum to Off Topic -- topic is not an immigration issue. ***

Edited December 19, 2012 by TBoneTX

[Jericho 28]

I'm sorry that I was not entirely clear in the original post. My fiance and I have many options available to us, but until July of 2013 when both of our contracts expire, we are stuck. One thing we do know is that we both want to live in the U.S. when we get married (tentatively planned for July 2013 as well).

I think you misunderstood my post. I am not seeking advice on corporate synergy vs. corporate integration strategies or how to better tailor the policies to the newly acquired company. The policies are set in stone and the parent company will not change them. Both companies had very similar HR policies, mostly differing just in language. The parent company can institute any policy they like as it is their prerogative as the owners.Of course they consulted with labor attorneys and distributed the new policies to each employee, as per standard business practices. Everything they are instituting is legal, according to U.S. and Texas state laws, so there is nothing to discuss further with an attorney.

When I used the term "they", I was referring to the previously mentioned employees who are actively resisting the no firearm policy.

I didn't provide more details because those are really the only facts that are pertinent to the scenario. The policies cannot be changed as they were already implemented. There is only 5 people who seem to have a problem with the integration. I disagree with your decision to move this thread to Off-Topic, and ask that you please restore it to it's previous location. From what I have read from the previous forum this thread was in, it is for people who have immigrated here and the issues they face adjusting to life in the U.S., which is the issue I am posting about. My fiance is not interested in corporate synergy or integration strategies, but why people are so reluctant to comply, and whether or not this is a cultural difference. I have not lived in the U.S. for more than a month or two in several years, so I thought I'd ask the people of Visa Journey who do live in the U.S. for opinions.

[TBoneTX 45,266]

Thanks for the clarification. The situation is very simple, then, and even simpler because Texas is a right-to-work state: the resistant employees either comply with the company policy or get written up and eventually fired. However, if they're good employees otherwise, perhaps they could be transferred off-site or work remotely, if either is feasible.

The situation is far beyond a mere cultural difference -- it's a fundamental political reality: the right to bear arms is guaranteed under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Period. The question is whether the resistant employees will comply with company policy. The cultural issue is for your fiancee to understand that the "pry from cold, dead fingers" comment is 99.44% certain NOT to be a personal threat, and that if she calls law enforcement to disarm the resistant employees, it will be overreaction to the extreme and could cause longer-lasting problems than what is now the case.

Edited to add: Your request to move this thread back to its original location has been respectfully reflected upon. The "Moving Here" forum is chiefly, if not exclusively, for very new immigrants who are trying to adjust; conversely, your fiancee has a high-level corporate position and is in a pickle comparatively far beyond what others here are facing. The "Working & Traveling" forum is intended for immigrants who are dealing with various stages of employment & travel authorization; conversely, your fiancee has a work permit and a high-level position. Because the topic is not specifically related to an immigration issue, the Off Topic forum is -- by default, if naught else -- the appropriate place for this thread and its topical matter. If you intensely disagree (and no problem if you do), hit the "report" button at lowest left of this message, and a VJ Moderator will make the final decision.

Sorry that circumstances are keeping you and your fiancee apart for the time being; please accept wishes that you can be together permanently very soon and that you have an uneventful, unimpeded path toward togetherness and citizenship.

Edited December 20, 2012 by TBoneTX

[Penguin_ie 5,993]

The topic is in the correct place for what it is asking, which seems to be mostly about the US gun culture/ how to explain this to your fiance? You state she does not wish to change the policy, just doesn't understand why some people are so against it. Well honestly, there will always be people fighting change. Gun culture is entrenched in parts of the USA, but it may also just be the one piece of the policy change that the employees decided to take a stand on because they don;t like any of it, but find it difficult to explain why.

[Jericho 28]

Thanks for the clarification. The situation is very simple, then, and even simpler because Texas is a right-to-work state: the resistant employees either comply with the company policy or get written up and eventually fired. However, if they're good employees otherwise, perhaps they could be transferred off-site or work remotely, if either is feasible.

The situation is far beyond a mere cultural difference -- it's a fundamental political reality: the right to bear arms is guaranteed under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Period. The question is whether the resistant employees will comply with company policy. The cultural issue is for your fiancee to understand that the "pry from cold, dead fingers" comment is 99.44% certain NOT to be a personal threat, and that if she calls law enforcement to disarm the resistant employees, it will be overreaction to the extreme and could cause longer-lasting problems than what is now the case.

Edited to add: Your request to move this thread back to its original location has been respectfully reflected upon. The "Moving Here" forum is chiefly, if not exclusively, for very new immigrants who are trying to adjust; conversely, your fiancee has a high-level corporate position and is in a pickle comparatively far beyond what others here are facing. The "Working & Traveling" forum is intended for immigrants who are dealing with various stages of employment & travel authorization; conversely, your fiancee has a work permit and a high-level position. Because the topic is not specifically related to an immigration issue, the Off Topic forum is -- by default, if naught else -- the appropriate place for this thread and its topical matter. If you intensely disagree (and no problem if you do), hit the "report" button at lowest left of this message, and a VJ Moderator will make the final decision.

Sorry that circumstances are keeping you and your fiancee apart for the time being; please accept wishes that you can be together permanently very soon and that you have an uneventful, unimpeded path toward togetherness and citizenship.

I don't see how you can say that this is 'beyond a mere cultural difference' as the U.S. is the only nation with such unrestricted gun laws and gun crime in the world. But you are the organizer, and Penguin is a moderator, so while I vehemently disagree with your decision, I must abide by it. My fiance has abandoned this website as she has no faith in it. She was the one who initially visited this website for advice, but received very little legitimate advice. Instead, she faced a barrage of PM's from various members soliciting the services of some third party company that would facilitate our visa request.

After my fiance received the "you can pry this gun from my cold dead hands" comment, she called me,and despite your advice Tbone, I advised her to call law enforcement if she really felt threatened by the statements of her coworker. Despite your advice TBone, law enforcement felt differently, that the statement was not puffery or just someone exaggerating, but a credible threat. So, I admonish you TBone to not give that advice further as it is reckless and you are not qualified to give that advice to people as you are neither an attorney, a prosecutor, or a law enforcement agent. From the initial conversation, the detective my fiance spoke to set up a meeting, after a last chance email was sent, and the detective monitored and evaluated the response. The detective, and his supervisor, established that this was a credible threat and responded accordingly. The following day, the local police showed up and set up a metal detector. Anyone that did not pass was inspected further and anyone that was found to be in possession of a firearm was terminated. The situation sorted itself out and all that remains is retaliatory lawsuits.

The issue at hand was the gun culture of the particular area that my fiance is living in, as a new resident of the U.S.. You however thought to distinguish nonsensical issues that were not germane to the scenario at hand. The issue is my fiance's issues as a new immigrant to the U.S., as a work visa recipient, nothing more or less. TBone, I hope you in the future will actually take more into account than your own issues and actually address the situation at hand, not just your perceived issues to address. Your reckless advice could have possibly put my fiance in jeopardy and I admonish you for that. I hope your family doesn't receive such irresponsible advice on this website. Please do not be so reckless in the future, without actually consulting all details.

[Jericho 28]

I should add that my my comments about my wife abandoning the site was because of contact via PM she received when she first registered on the site from some people soliciting their services.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Thanks for the clarification. The situation is very simple, then, and even simpler because Texas is a right-to-work state: the resistant employees either comply with the company policy or get written up and eventually fired. However, if they're good employees otherwise, perhaps they could be transferred off-site or work remotely, if either is feasible.

Aye to the former but why to the latter. Why would a company want to reward or accommodate staff that simply refuses to comply with basic company policies? You either get in line or you get out. This isn't an area where any employer owes any employee any accommodation. If you don't like the policies of the firm you work for, then go work for a more suitable firm. Period. Rewarding refusal to comply with policy would be a rather stupid move. It sets precedent and opens a can of worms that you do not want to open.

[TBoneTX 45,266]

Aye to the former but why to the latter. Why would a company want to reward or accommodate staff that simply refuses to comply with basic company policies? You either get in line or you get out. This isn't an area where any employer owes any employee any accommodation. If you don't like the policies of the firm you work for, then go work for a more suitable firm. Period. Rewarding refusal to comply with policy would be a rather stupid move. It sets precedent and opens a can of worms that you do not want to open.

Job Transfer, n. - a promotion that you receive on the condition that you leave town.