Juan, do you even read my posts?
Post #27 second sentence...Quote: A gentleman from the North Texas district H.Q. for Sherwin Williams returned my call just now and stated that Sherwin Williams does not have a no firearms policy.
The first sentence of the very next paragraph in post #27 also clearly states their policy. No? Yes?
Yes, I did read your post(s). No, it does not "clearly" state their policy. Believe it or not, there do exist companies that allow such policies to be set at the regional, district, or even
store level. Uncommon, perhaps...but stating that Sherwin Williams as a whole does not have a no-firearms policy does
not necessarily mean that this individual store's policy isn't condoned and does not imply that the sign will be taken down.
Now, had you said that Sherwin Williams had a "firearms allowed" policy...then
that would logically have implied the rest.
First Don, the district guys response seemed to strongly indicate to me that the store here would be told to remove the sign.
Second, as I have stated numerous times before the clerks verification of the sign was all I needed, he is after all an agent of the Co.
My further investigation into Corporate policy was simply for your benefit.
That clerk may well have only been working there for the last two weeks, and may know nearly nothing about company policies and procedures. I'd hardly consider him "an agent of the company," at least not when it comes to finding out information about policies. For all you know he's been taken aside, yelled at, given a final notice, and well on his way to being fired. Same for the store manager, or whoever happened to put up the "no firearms" sign.
Also, your further investigation wasn't just "for our benefit." It's necessary in order to not be just another guy smearing a company when really he doesn't know what heck he's talking about. If the sign is remove and the manager who put it up sanctioned, then there would be
no reason for anybody here not to continue to patronize Sherwin Williams...however, if somebody of questionable critical thinking skills had only read the first few posts here then they may well have just lost a customer for no good reason.
Basically, it's important for you to get all your facts straight before you run around telling stories. Ideally you would have waited to start this thread until you had received the reply back from the district manager.
You have decided to take the stance that since your store has no such sign you will continue to shop there.
I on the other hand choose not support any Co. who would deny a licensed citizen the right to carry on their premises regardless if that business is next door or across the country.
No, he took the stance that since his store had no such sign (and thus obviously it was not a corporate policy) he'd find out what the corporate policy was before he made any decisions, or spread any rumors. As it turns out, it appears that we may have no reason not to support this company, and that they would not deny a licensed citizen the right to carry. You really shouldn't punish a company for the actions of one rogue manager. Especially if the company doesn't support those actions, reverses them, and (more than likely) takes action against the manager.
