Lifeguard fired for saving a man's life.
- Thread starter Bvenged
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Let me explain why what he did was theoretically dangerous and why the rules are very specific.
While compassion is good and all and jumping right on the he saved a man train is fine, think about the full situation of why they have a rule like "Don't go outside your zone". These Lifeguards are assigned certain areas to watch. If this lifeguard leaves his area un-watched in order to do something in someone elses area, who saves someone if they start drowning in his jurisdiction?
Yes, this is an almost ridiculously improbable scenario, but the rule is there for that possibility. Outright firing the guy was a bit of a steep reaction (they did later offer him his job back), but the rule isn't there for no reason. Ask some Firemen sometime if they like heroes, or the people who do their job by the book.
In this case, everything worked out well and there were no complications and so I think that it would have been more appropriate to reiterate to the lifeguard why his duty reads the way it does and reprimand the lifeguard whose duty it was originally to save the man in question.
While compassion is good and all and jumping right on the he saved a man train is fine, think about the full situation of why they have a rule like "Don't go outside your zone". These Lifeguards are assigned certain areas to watch. If this lifeguard leaves his area un-watched in order to do something in someone elses area, who saves someone if they start drowning in his jurisdiction?
Yes, this is an almost ridiculously improbable scenario, but the rule is there for that possibility. Outright firing the guy was a bit of a steep reaction (they did later offer him his job back), but the rule isn't there for no reason. Ask some Firemen sometime if they like heroes, or the people who do their job by the book.
In this case, everything worked out well and there were no complications and so I think that it would have been more appropriate to reiterate to the lifeguard why his duty reads the way it does and reprimand the lifeguard whose duty it was originally to save the man in question.
Beurocratic bs at its finest. I hate to say that this doesn't surprise me. There is way too much red tape in this situation.
Also, what is up with all of the people defending the company that fired him? Yes, he left his post, but it wasn't to talk to girls or buy some ice cream. It was to help someone who was drowning.
Also, what is up with all of the people defending the company that fired him? Yes, he left his post, but it wasn't to talk to girls or buy some ice cream. It was to help someone who was drowning.
As an update, two other lifeguards were ALSO let go because they were sat down and asked by managers if they would do the same thing in the same situation, which they confirmed.
Because of the media outlash, Thomas was offered his job back, along with anyone else who quit or was let go in relation to this. The leader of the company said, and I quote,
As a lifeguard myself, I would find it morally horrendous to not help a swimmer in need, and applaud Thomas's actions.
Because of the media outlash, Thomas was offered his job back, along with anyone else who quit or was let go in relation to this. The leader of the company said, and I quote,
He also said, in regard to beach safety:
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/broward/fl-lifeguard-follow-20120704,0,4887768.story
As a lifeguard myself, I would find it morally horrendous to not help a swimmer in need, and applaud Thomas's actions.