craig328: dlp211: craig328: In the time that the kid is gone, his assigned area of water is without lifesaving services should the emergency arise.

No, it wasn't, it was covered down on.

craig328: how about a scenario where someone on his stretch of water swims out, has a cramp and drowns?

Then that is a failure on the part of the lifeguard that was covering his zone.
href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7197102/77875215#c77875215" target="_blank">craig328: Our hero is a quarter mile down the beach

Which a good lifeguard can get to in less then 75 seconds.
href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7197102/77875215#c77875215" target="_blank">craig328: There is no mention that he got anyone to cover for him.

If you would have read even a fraction of the thread or the original article or did a google search you would know that his zone was covered.

Hm...you're taking me to task for an updated article when I clearly posted my comments about the original (that didn't include the pieces you quote), I didn't read a fraction of the article that was posted...I read the entire thing. It's that pesky difference between my posting time (2012-07-05 10:58:32 AM) and the article's update time (12:55 p.m. EDT, July 5, 2012) that may have you considering a refresher course in telling time as opposed to blurting snark about "RTF" article.

Telling time...how does that work?

/good for the kid, he should only have been reprimanded anyway per the original circumstances
//clearly didn't tell his boss though...looks like he arranged coverage on his own

No, I am taking you to task because you failed to answer the question for yourself instead relying on a single source as your point of information. As it was posted many times before in the thread, his post was covered, this had nothing to do with RTFA, and everything to do with reading the original article, or a corroborating article, or doing a google search, or RTFT. You know what happens when you assume, this time you only made an ass of yourself though.

Jz4p: Or possibly "Man drowns swimming in unprotected beach." with a note that the closest life-guard stand was a half mile away.

First of all, a quarter of a mile away. And while that may seem like a really far distance, anything that a fairly athletic person can cover in less then a minute isn't really that far.

At least this guy won't have trouble getting a job.
I think a lot of DECENT companies would love to have him as an employee.

We're missing something. Perhaps this was a guy they were just aching to fire before this happened and this just gave them an excuse. Perhaps because he was an overall bad employee, or maybe they didn't want him around because he is apparently Latino. At any rate, these "executives" are clearly idiots as they apparently did not take into account the PR nightmare this would cause. It makes them look callous and uncaring to direct their employees to stand by and do nothing if someone just outside their area is going under. Not the type of organiziation anyone wants to do business with.

Moreover, surely it is written in the guidelines that an employee may abandon his post in certain situations (i.e. tsunami coming). I would think saving someone's life falls under that umbrella of reasons, so the company was technically wrong in addition to being morally wrong in terminating the guy..

Morons. I doubt their contract gets renewed after this.

ph0rk: kevinatilusa: When I was in college I took one Organizational Management course taught by a visiting Business Prof. Part of the course was a unit on "Business Ethics", which basically boiled down to:

Step 1: Professor/textbook states an ethical dilemma
Step 2: We figure out which solution makes the company the most money.
Step 3: Whichever solution we found in step 2 is the ethical solution, because "a company's only ethical responsibility is the fiduciary responsibility to the shareholder."

Fortunately, I was able to hold my nose enough to regurgitate all this on the exam.

It is sickening, but anything else is borderline malfeasance.

/What is sad is I was able to come the same conclusion as above with only a cynical view of capitalism.
//But no, it isn't about greed, not at all.
///Something something Deepwater Horizon.

Crap like that makes me glad I am a Police Officer who is in the National Guard.

I want to help people, save lives, and do the right thing, not fret about profit margins and stock values.

The business world is for amoral, greedy people. The system is set up to encourage that.

Why are people wanting to privatize more public services again?

Firing him was not the correct response, however the company is stuck between a rock and a hard place. Sure, letting someone drown outside your zone is bad, but on the other hand, what if someone else had been in trouble while the lifeguard was running to rescue the person outside the zone? The person within the zone drowns, his family sues the company for millions of dollars, the company goes out of business. Also note that by the time the lifeguard manages to run 1500 feet outside of his zone, the drowning person is probably either rescued already or dead.

The -real- ones at fault here are the ones hiring the company but not paying enough to cover the whole beach.

[csb]
I took an unfortunate and ill-timed(high tide and rough ocean, I didn't even have time to take off my boots, and it's a biatch swimming in a pair of combat boots and jeans) dive to help out a kid the other day who got knocked off the landing on the pier by a sea lion(seriously, wtf, they're enormous predators even if they are "cute", the "dad" was pretty much pissing himself instead of helping his kid so I went over the side behind my line to help the kid back up and make the sea lion fark off since his dad was apparently useless) so I'm getting a kick, etc. Bastard didn't even offer to buy me a drink after. Thanks is fine, but I'm farking terrified of swimming in the ocean and there's a bar about thirty feet away from where we fish for halibut, guy coulda bought me a beer at least since he didn't have the balls to deal with it himself.
[/csb]

I always figured those of us with lifeguard training(I guess I got something out of being a Boy Scout) are supposed to help people who're in the water and struggling, zoning bullshiat aside. I guess not. That's shiat, it really is, I'm glad I've never worked that profession. According to the update they're being offered their jobs back, I sure as hell wouldn't take it. I can't imagine having a job where you're basically supposed to save people then getting fired for doing it.

amindtat: From the article in the sidebar:

[www.sun-sentinel.com image 400x608]

I wish I was her whistle.

I move that we discuss her and others like her now for the remainder of the comments.

dlp211: No, I am taking you to task because you failed to answer the question for yourself instead relying on a single source as your point of information. As it was posted many times before in the thread, his post was covered, this had nothing to do with RTFA, and everything to do with reading the original article, or a corroborating article, or doing a google search, or RTFT. You know what happens when you assume, this time you only made an ass of yourself though.

Yep. I'll coast through a few hundred inane comments that make even your drivel seem like Einstein by comparison just because you CAN'T FARKING TELL TIME. I get it that you're a petty douche too eager to make a misguided point on the intarwebz dick swinging stage but you misfired on that attempt, little fella. Thread is about the article that was posted. If you're truly digging through the Googles and devouring every link on a 500+ post thread...well, at least we can all breathe a sigh of relief knowing your particular social deficiency will expire along with you.

Have a great day there, sluggo. Run along and hump someone else's leg for awhile.

dlp211: Jz4p: Or possibly "Man drowns swimming in unprotected beach." with a note that the closest life-guard stand was a half mile away.

First of all, a quarter of a mile away. And while that may seem like a really far distance, anything that a fairly athletic person can cover in less then a minute isn't really that far.

I don't question your statement of speed, but it was a quarter mile outside his 'covered area', which likely had a centralized guard station, iirc. So a bit further.

lordargent: buckler: Any decent company would have given him a bonus and other rewards for going above and beyond the call of duty, which can only serve to enhance the company's prestige and value to future customers.

Until something goes wrong and they get sued by someone who uses the fact that they were outside of the zone they were contracted to protect as part of the prosecution.

opening up the company to liability issues.

I don't get why anyone is surprised at the actions of the company, it's dumb, but this is the society we live in now. No different than the people who get fired from convenience store jobs from trying to stop a robbery vs just handing the money over.

I prefer to think of corporations as mindless automatons and not as caring feeling humans :P

// the company you want to look out for is the one that would let him work for a little longer THEN fire him.

THIS

We live in a country controlled by lawyers. Nobody should be surprised. Logic goes out the window and everything always comes down to legal liability.

At least the lifeguards who quit/got fired get the satisfaction of watching the company go down in flames.

BronyMedic: lisarenee3505: I have to disagree with your last deceleration here. It has been my experience that most folks will act accordingly when they see a life in jeopardy.

Really? It's been the exact opposite in my experience. Since Tennessee revoked the good Samaritan protections they extended to healthcare professionals in 2008, a lot of people I know have stopped carrying equipment off duty, and refuse to do anything but call 911 unless they see someone fall out in front of them. In my professional experience, the majority of people I've encountered rendering aid on accidents and at emergencies are people who just have basic First Aid and CPR training.

lisarenee3505: The unfortunate truth though is that many of those folks will pay a price for their concern for their fellow human if things don't turn out well or if they chose to act "off book" like the lifeguard here did. It sucks, but that is the world we live in. I like to say that people should put the "right thing" ahead of the "profitable thing" (the term "profit" meaning "whatever will get me ahead, or at least not put me behind"), but the cold hard truth is that in the contemporary world the "right thing" can often come back to bite you in the ass.

Pretty much this. You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
================================================

Ahh, yeah I see your point. I think the difference is that you were referring to a specific demographic (healthcare professionals) while I was talking about people in general. I've personally rendered aid three times at car accidents, but I guess I fall into the latter group you talked about because my medical training consists of going through Combat Lifesaver training at Ft. Campbell when I was in the Army. It's basically just advanced first-aid... though I did graduate on the Commandant's list, so I guess I paid more attention in class than most.

/that was like 17 years ago though

slimkibbles: lordargent: buckler: Any decent company would have given him a bonus and other rewards for going above and beyond the call of duty, which can only serve to enhance the company's prestige and value to future customers.

Until something goes wrong and they get sued by someone who uses the fact that they were outside of the zone they were contracted to protect as part of the prosecution.

opening up the company to liability issues.

I don't get why anyone is surprised at the actions of the company, it's dumb, but this is the society we live in now. No different than the people who get fired from convenience store jobs from trying to stop a robbery vs just handing the money over.

I prefer to think of corporations as mindless automatons and not as caring feeling humans :P

// the company you want to look out for is the one that would let him work for a little longer THEN fire him.

THIS

We live in a country controlled by lawyers. Nobody should be surprised. Logic goes out the window and everything always comes down to legal liability.

Maybe I just need to give up my idealism and memories of the America I thought was great.

lisarenee3505: Ahh, yeah I see your point. I think the difference is that you were referring to a specific demographic (healthcare professionals) while I was talking about people in general.

Sorry. I didn't mean to confuse the issue here. Sometimes, I mix my trolling with legitimate conversation, so I apologize for doing that with you if I did so.

It's pretty much to the point where if you're going to stop and help off duty, you better have your own malpractice insurance seperate from your employer for Healthcare Providers. Which is sad, thanks to our litigious society.

lisarenee3505: I've personally rendered aid three times at car accidents, but I guess I fall into the latter group you talked about because my medical training consists of going through Combat Lifesaver training at Ft. Campbell when I was in the Army. It's basically just advanced first-aid... though I did graduate on the Commandant's list, so I guess I paid more attention in class than most.

Which is awesome. Really, that is. More people should do this. The problem comes in that the legal interest groups which represent the ambulance chasers have been able to get the Good Samaritan protections changed in many states so they do not cover anyone with a civilian healthcare license.

BronyMedic: Which is awesome. Really, that is. More people should do this. The problem comes in that the legal interest groups which represent the ambulance chasers have been able to get the Good Samaritan protections changed in many states so they do not cover anyone with a civilian healthcare license.

Ambulance chasers are the entire problem, with a lot of things.

Decades ago, if you were a smart kid, good debater and good writer and studious, they'd say you could be a great attorney.

Being a lawyer became a go-to career path for many. They were raised to think of being a lawyer as a guaranteed good career.

Then the job market flooded with them, slowly but surely. Can't make a big living (and pay off those student loans) defending poor people and writing wills. Lawyers as a whole started being more proactive looking for cases. Ambulance chaser went from being the most desperate and despicable of attorneys, to folks trying to make a living the only way they knew how.

Our society became overlitigated in the process. We need lawyer for many things, yes, but we could probably make due with about 25% of the ones we have right now. If 3/4 of American attorneys turned in their Bar licenses and found other professions and stayed there (and we cut Law School class sizes accordingly) we'd see a sharp drop in frivolous lawsuits and overlitigation pretty quickly.

As for me, yeah, I've got Army CLS training and Civilian Red Cross First Aid/CPR/AED. I've only had to help a stranger once, but I was the one that did it while the "bystander effect" took over and a half-dozen people just stood there and stared and wondered aloud "should we like, call somebody or something?"

slimkibbles: lordargent: buckler: Any decent company would have given him a bonus and other rewards for going above and beyond the call of duty, which can only serve to enhance the company's prestige and value to future customers.

Until something goes wrong and they get sued by someone who uses the fact that they were outside of the zone they were contracted to protect as part of the prosecution.

opening up the company to liability issues.

I don't get why anyone is surprised at the actions of the company, it's dumb, but this is the society we live in now. No different than the people who get fired from convenience store jobs from trying to stop a robbery vs just handing the money over.

I prefer to think of corporations as mindless automatons and not as caring feeling humans :P

// the company you want to look out for is the one that would let him work for a little longer THEN fire him.

THIS

We live in a country controlled by lawyers. Nobody should be surprised. Logic goes out the window and everything always comes down to legal liability.

Ellis & Associates is an aquatics law firm by birth. They used to be based in Kingwood, TX and have "clients" who rely on them to have the best guards in the country. They have intensive training sessions for their guards, YEARLY re-certification, and unannounced "audits" where the guards are secretly videotaped by an Ellis representative (an "Auditor") then said guards are taken to the side with their management (their zones eing covered by another guard of course) then run through rescue paces including CPR and first aid skills while being videotaped and evaluated. I worked for this firm for 5 years as a National Instructor and an Auditor. Their move is not surprising to me based on my experience. Having said that, I've saved lives outside my "Zone" before without any issues, however, being their experiences have included many water parks and recreational facilties (including Dorney Park & Wild Water Kingdom drownings) and they've had to produce the "audit tapes" to prove their guards knew what the fark they were doing and weren't just minimum wage kids trying to get a tan and laid over the Summer I am really not shocked by their actions. I am not saying it was morally right, but they also are protecting their client contractually. If this kid followed protocol then he would have blown his whistle and signaled for another guard to cover his zone while he went to help the person in distress. If another guard was unavailable then he abandoned his zone, the people he was to be protecting within the guarded area, and placed them at risk gambling nothing was going to happen while he ran 1500 meters down the beach and waited for paramedics. It was a personal choice, and IMO, the correct one. E&A's decision was also the correct one, however, damages their public brand in process.

Tatterdemalian: farkingatwork: thewulf: God farking damnit people. You don't even realize what's going on, do you....

You created this society.
A society where good samaritans do what they can to help and get sued in the process.
This is your fault.

Now live in this miserable little world you created.

/Glad I don't live in the US

Umm, no.

Lifeguards can and do get sued for doing lifesaving stuff all the damn time. This doesn't mean they shouldn't try to save lives. It'd be like the world's most ethical and best doctor doing everything they can to save a patient but the patient dies anyway, and the doc gets sued.

The difference is the lifeguard did what was right here and the company did what was company focused. Was it a good decision by the company? Hell no. Let the media bring this company to a halt until they step back from someone in management clearly not giving a fark about how this makes the company look.

So, the company gets sued out of existence if they don't enforce company policy, and gets brought to a halt by the media if they do enforce company policy. And you not only support this state of affairs, but take pride in it, apparently because companies suck and we'd all be better off without any privately organized workforces at all.

/you will get exactly that
//even if you change your mind now, even if that wasn't what you wanted, it's already too late

Uh, the company isn't even being sued. Way to umm, extrapolate a single example into some kind of worldview you presume I'm having which I'm not. Welcome to ignore.

My point was very simple: it is not the company that is in the wrong nor the ex employee. It is the fact that they didn't provide a reasonable answer that is explicitly unacceptable. Had they given an honest PR answer instead of being a typical dinosaur organization who is unfamiliar with 2012, it could have been something like "we're glad he was able to save a life but he violated company policy". Do you think that would have sounded better than just "he violated company policy". Instead they don't figure this out until a thousand people basically threaten to blow up the organization, send threats, etc. Basically "we're going to be dicks until forced otherwise". that is the issue.

This is called Darwin-ing of a company by self destruction, not the least of which highlighted by the company backtracking *way* too late and offering to rehire the lifeguard (read article). Too little, too late.

The guys who are "offered" their jobs back like it's a favor should get a raise and 2 weeks pay for their troubles.