I just shake my head at this stuff...

[cat man do]

Its a fked up world we live in

This one happened not long ago in England

Charity shop worker drowned in lake just 3ft deep after firemen refused to wade in due to health and safety rules
Drowning Simon Burgess, 41, was just 20ft away from firefighters but inquest hears they refused to save him
Police officer who went in to water was ordered back
Witness claims firemen told her they couldn't go in if water was more than 'ankle deep'


Read more: Simon Burgess drowned after firemen refused to wade in 3ft deep lake due to health and safety rules | Mail Online

And then this crazy sht in the US of A

'Cruel' punishment for first offence: Quartavious Davis, 20, jailed for 162 years with no parole

Read more: 'Cruel' punishment for first offence: Quartavious, 20, jailed for 162 years with no parole

And the filth online that is found when you google this guys name is just unbelievable.

Its a sad world

[carstenb]

This past winter, my wife and I woke up at 2 in the morning. We always sleep with a window open (fortunately). We could hear someone yelling outside. Looking out, we saw a man desperately hanging on to an outcropping in the canal in front of our house. This was early March in Copenhagen, water temp was just at freezing.

So what did we do? Call someone and wait? Say "not my table". No we ran outside, got a rope, one of us (happened to be me) jumped in (cold as hell), and got the guy to a ladder where we got him up and out of the water. Thereafter we called the ambulance.

Happily, he was a young guy and once we poured a couple of gallons of hot coffee in him and got him warm and dry clothes he was all right (I froze my a** off and needed the coffee also).

Why tell this story? We could no more have let that guy drown than this lifeguard should have let the person on the beach drown.

When the chips are down - you do what you gotta do and what you can.

Hope that guy gets a new job that pays better - he deserves it

[Mike OReilly]

This lifeguard story is the logical consequence of a culture (my culture) that only measures value with dollar signs.

It doesn't have to be this way.

[sailinman]

the fear of being sued is only a small part of it... the bigger issue is the lack of insurance coverage... their insurance would deny claims left and right...

if the guy he saved didnt actually survive, the families would sue and try to collect and not get anything, if someone else got hurt while the do gooder was busy on the wrong side of the line the insurance wouldnt pay as the company didnt comply with the terms.. etc..

the company doesnt want to pay... so they need to comply with their rules and requirements of the policies and their contracts...

it's all about the rules.... stupid rules most of the time... whether it is this example or other examples... folks are prohibitited from using common sense...

writing a ticket for not having a throwable on a single handed vessel??? what purpose does a toossable have, but yet it is a rule...

we need to stand up to entities that write stupid rules... and demand that common sense prevail on a case by case basis...

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

This lifeguard story is the logical consequence of a culture (my culture) that only measures value with dollar signs.

It doesn't have to be this way.

Mike has it right (sadly)

Money can be counted but not valued.

[Mr B]

Most rescue services in Australia are Volunteers, Life saving, Marine rescue, SES, CFA, Etc,

There are no lines here to cross, Some one is in trouble, they all pitch in to help,

That includes the paid professionals, Police, Fire, Ambo's, Navy, Airforce, Army,

What ever and who ever is needed, They are there as soon as possible,

There is no mention of cost or reimbursement, from any one,

Its the right thing to do, and they do it,

Its the only way it can be done, Keep the money side out of it completely,

You help people because you can, Not for a payment, Thats just ********,

[Pete7]

Catchy headline, wonder if it is really true or just some newspaper trying to sell editions.

Pete

[zeehag]

would be different if the government ridded itself of the corruption lobbies and lobbyists are and cause--insurance would not be as strong if no lobbies to push it so hard and get the kickbacks they get and pay the legislators to make the laws they want.

[Celestialsailor]

Did you even read the thread? It was about a lifeguard being let go for helping...not Government lobbyist.

[Celestialsailor]

Can you imagine the consequences and outcry if the lifeguard had simple ignored the guy in the surf and had drown? Either way, he would be screwed.
If the company had been smart, They would have used the PR..."Lifeguard runs 1500 ft. to save drowning man". The company who hired him would get many more contracts from other beach communities. The Lifeguard would still have his job and everyone would live happily-ever-after.
Generally in life, it's not about the event...it's about how you react to it.

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by David_Old_Jersey

As I said, damned if they do - damned if they don't.

If they hadn't fired him then the next time it happened and things went wrong (esp. on the unguarded beach) - then first step would be for the Company / Directors? / Owners? to get butts sued, which doesn't matter(?) if the Insurance company stands behind them and the Company has SFA better to do than spend time in court. Depending on the size of the company that could be an end of game event. Or maybe even the City / State they contracted to would use the event as an excuse to terminate the contract. Folks will lose livelihoods as well as Owners losing money - all for no fault of their own. It's the system innit .

Perhaps sounds harsh, but if it was a choice between saving a stranger from a burning building (or the water) and me risking losing my livelihood then all I can say is that the Stranger better have f#cking big tits, and be gagging for it - and then still only a maybe. I've known people who have died over less money. Give me the rules and I will play by them - no matter how dumb they are or that they have unintended consequences.

'They should already have had a solution for this.

If the young man had gone out to rescue someone who WAS in his "area," the rest of the swimmers would have been unprotected. There should be an automatic way to cover occupied lifeguards. For instance, maybe a rip current has developed. This means more people could end up in trouble while the lifeguard is resqueing the first one.

The company is at fault. To expect that young man to live for the rest of his life with the knowledge that someone died he might have helped save because of a company's rigid rules is absurd, no matter how "business-like" the company's decision. That's no comfort. When life and death are on the line, some things become more important to rules.

IMO that's where the company has blown it. They could take this incident and go from a good company to a great one and leave everyone better protected. For instance, they must have a supervisor (somebody fired that young man). The supervisor could step into any guard zone the moment that guard had to go do a rescue or help in some other way.

It's absurd. Suppose an MD is assigned to be on duty at a football game in case someone goes into cardiac arrest, but he's hired to protect the fans, and a vendor collapses? Is he supposed to let the vendor die because a fan *might* collapse while he was saving the vendor?

No doctor would ever stand by and watch someone die because the person wasn't on his or her turf.

[David M]

That Florida bureaucracy does not deserve to have a hero like Tomas Lopez as one of their employees.

[Skip20]

Unarguably this situation has more aspects than a cat has hair; but I smell lawsuit . . .

[zeehag]

cs--do you know how laws are truly made??? and how on job performance is dictated??
if you did, you would not argue my point on lobbies and the effect on insurance and other allegedly necessary items we used to live without so nicely. brings to mind the extortion rings of old times.
pay or not do.
lobbies made the need for insurance and it has become a scam out of control yet we still allegedly need the services.
lobbies and tort law..both need to be modified massively. until that happens, most good samaritan jobs will remain, and become even more, restricted to within the area of assignment. no leaving your zone to help someone in distress.
the days of good samaritans is over. we are now punished for helping others--yet again. yes--the lifeguards are good sams--why else would they work for so little pay to do so much good for others

[Rakuflames]

Originally Posted by David M

That Florida bureaucracy does not deserve to have a hero like Tomas Lopez as one of their employees.

David, I understand what you're saying, but it's based on some misconceptions.

First of all, this has nothing to do with Florida law. Each community in Florida decides if it will have -- or hire out -- a Life Guard Corps or not. Some beaches are protected, and some are not. My favorite beach, in Venice, has no life guards. It is strictly swim at your own risk, and the water can be rough there.

In this case, it's even further distanced by law because the town hired its life guard corps through a private contractor. It is that private contractor who made the call that the young man should be fired. It has nothing to do with Florida law.