Lifeguard fired for having rescued drowning man

[Skybird]

Just any source, originally I stumbled over this in a German newspaper.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/ar...ida-beach-zone

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/05/us...red/index.html

Speechless. I hope the company owner's property gets struck by lightning and goes off in fire. If "liabilities" demand employees to just stand and watch others dying, then something is terribly porked there.

[BossMark]

That is unbelievable this man should have been praised, those who did the firing should hang their heads in shame and resign their post.

[Herr-Berbunch]

I hope other companies are now fighting for him!

[Jimbuna]

Company supervisor Susan Ellis told WPTV that Lopez was let go for violating its policy.
"We have liability issues and can't go out of the protected area," she said. "What he did was his own decision. He knew the company rules and did what he thought he needed to do."

I wouldn't go relying on help if you ever get into difficulties whilst swimming Susan.

[kranz]

There was a similar case in Poland, around 2 years ago. A young boy was drowning, he was spotted by a 17-18 year old kid who jumped into the lake without much thinking. When he grabbed him in the middle of the lake, they were spotted by a two-policemen patrol. They called an ambulance and....stood on the bank shouting "You will make it". The official response from the police was that they "were not trained in life-guarding, thus their lack of initiative cannot be regarded as any violation of rules, thus their decision not to jump was OK"
I told this story to my friend who is a life guard and I was ofc angry that they did not react. He said that I have no idea about life guarding etc...
It made me re-think the case a bit...obviously, from a "moral" point of view the life-guard's decision was good, but what would happen if somebody had drowned in his zone? Where was the guy responsible for the "southern" zone? Was he fired as well? Besides, these zones haven't been made for "fun". If he decided to work there, he must have been aware of the "zone" policy and "strategies" concerning leaving an outpost in case of emergency. If he deliberately violated these rules...

[Herr-Berbunch]

Plamen Petkov rescued a five-year-old girl just a month or so ago and then suffered a heart attack. Who knows what underlying conditions we all have that may only be brought to the surface (definately no pun intended!) when we react on instinct.

I'd still rather go this way than be a gibbering wreck whilst my family wait for my telegram from HM King William V. But not for a good few years.

[NeonSamurai]

Originally Posted by kranz

There was a similar case in Poland, around 2 years ago. A young boy was drowning, he was spotted by a 17-18 year old kid who jumped into the lake without much thinking. When he grabbed him in the middle of the lake, they were spotted by a two-policemen patrol. They called an ambulance and....stood on the bank shouting "You will make it". The official response from the police was that they "were not trained in life-guarding, thus their lack of initiative cannot be regarded as any violation of rules, thus their decision not to jump was OK"

Honestly I would actually side with the police. As someone who did do lifeguard training, trying to save a drowning person is a very risky thing. People who are drowning are usually in a state of total panic, and will do stuff like trying to get on top so they can try to stand on the person trying to save them (there have been several cases of would be life savers drowning with the person they were trying to save for just such a reason).

[Falkirion]

I think it's ridiculous that he was fired. He did his job and saved another persons life despite going against company policy and their designated protection area. It really was a catch 22 situation for the lifeguard.

A life is a life, and we all deserve to live ours to the best of our abilities.

[AVGWarhawk]

Tribesman:
The particular manner he is trained in is to cover the area he is responsible for.

In correct. He was instructed to guard a particular area. He is trained to save lives. Saving a life does not know any perimeters that I'm aware of.

I'll say it again Tribesman. He was damned if he did and damned if he didn't. I will make it a point not to swim in a area you might be guarding. Company policy might prevent you from committing a life saving act!

If he sat and did nothing while the swimmer drowned you would probably believe he was a lout and should have performed his lifesaving despite company policy. Fire him for his inaction!

[Redloc]

Its simply an HR issue. He should be praised of course, but the company must have its employees follow its rules, and it must show consistency in its response.