Lifeguard fired...

[Shay]

...for doing what he's been trained to do; saving a drowning victim.

http://www.manolith.com/2012/07/05/flor ... tim-video/

[chex]

I saw this, and I understand the rule. The person saved was in a "swim at your own risk" section. What would happen if the life guard is saving him, a guy who knows is in an unguarded area, and someone needs help in the area he's supposed to be watching. I mean, the chances of that happening are slim to nil, but I understand the rule.

But I definitely do not think he should have been fired over it.

[Moe]

I understand that he violated the rules he was given, but in that situation, I know I would have done the same thing...

[Beany]

In my opinion, they should have disciplined him at the most. Part of being a life guard is wanting to save lives with no regard to 'risk zones'. I think the company is in the wrong here, even though he is too.

[Moe]

but in that situation, I know I would have done the same thing...

But actually I wouldn't have, because I can't swim very well.

[Shay]

I just think it's a lot of febreeze. I'm not going to sit and watch someone die if I have the power to save them, regardless if it was their own damn fault. That's just not my motto. If I was in the same shoes, and even if I knew ahead of time that my choice would get me fired, I'd have still done it.

[chex]

But at the same time, he abandoned his post, leaving the people who were swimming in an area that is supposed to be manned on their own. I would have done the same thing, mind you, but I can clearly see the other side.

[Shay]

I get the rule, but it's too black and white. It makes more sense for the rule to be there just to make sure the lifeguard isn't off smurf around and ignoring his duty. But in the sense of leaving your post to save someone, I think that's a very different matter.

[chex]

They need to cover themselves though. If someone I loved drowned while swimming in an area that is supposed to have a lifeguard because the lifeguard was saving someone who chose to swim in an unguarded area, I'd be smurf suing.

[Shay]

Fine, if we're going to bring in highly unlikely "what if" scenarios that didn't happen...

What if the next area over had two people drowning and the lifeguard posted there could only make it to one? Now he has to pick. The families are going to be pissed no matter which one he goes after and based on your logic will likely sue. Now the lifeguard posted next to him has the ability to save the second one and nothing is wrong in his area. Should he then sit and watch? I guarantee you people will try to sue over that too.

[Moe]

But the area the guy was swimming in didn't have a life guard, it was a "Swim at your own risk" area.

So I understand the organisations decision to fire him, because he was taking the risk even though he know that there were no lifeguards for that area... So even if he didn't save the guy, and the family sued, the family wouldn't win the lawsuit, because it was posted that it was a "Swim at your own risk" swim area.

[chex]

If they're saving someone in a guarded area, I'd say they're covered. If someone in the designated area dies because they had to waste their time on someone who chose to swim in an undesignated area, that's where the problem is. I equate it to rescue workers having to go to risky areas to save people who refused to evacuate. If you take that risk, fine. But you don't get to put others at risk.

[Shay]

You're faulting a guy for actually being a decent person which is often hard to come by. Fault the idiot who disregarded the sign, don't fault the gentleman who risked his own life -- and his job --(or by your words "wasted his time") to save them.

[Wesley]

The lifeguard was not thinking as an employee, he was thinking as a lifeguard. Someone who saves lives.

[bella]

As a lifeguard he had the moral obligation to act as he did. It is a shame that the company fired him for doing his duty. Should he have left that man to his fate someone for sure would have sued him. He did his job, if he hadn't he always would have had the death of this man on his conscience.
It is a shame when rules become more important than a human life.

[chex]

Those rules are there to protect the human lives in the designated area. By leaving his area, he wasn't doing his duty.

[Wesley]

This is a fascinating debate.

[chex]

And how!

[Shay]

I have been enjoying this debate. I haven't been apart of one since Santorum was actually a potential candidate for the Republican party.

[Wesley]

The guy getting fired for potentially letting someone drown in his area is like me getting arrested for potentially raping someone just because I have an erection.

I would suggest that the guy receive a reprimand, no more harsh than if here left his post to take a piss or something. In both situations he abandoned his post. In both situations nobody drowned in his zone.