Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fired Florida Lifeguard's Coworkers Out After Admitting They'd Save Man Outside Zone
ABC News ^ | July 4, 2012 | ALEXIS SHAW, MATT GUTMAN, CANDACE SMITH, KATIE MOISSE

Posted on 07/04/2012 3:58:33 PM PDT by dayglored

Six Florida lifeguards have lost their jobs for backing a coworker's decision to save a man struggling in the surf but outside their jurisdiction.

Tomas Lopez , 21, was fired Monday for vacating his lifeguarding zone to save a man drowning in unprotected waters 1,500 feet south of his post on Hallandale Beach, Fla.

"I knew I broke the rules," said Lopez, who ran past the buoy marking the boundary of his patrol zone to help the man. "I told the manager, I'm fired aren't I?"

Lopez said he jumped into the water and "I double underhooked him…I was worried about the guy and his health. He was blue."

Six of Lopez's coworkers said they would have done the same thing. And now, they've been fired too.

....

(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: florida; lifeguard; moralabsolutes; zerotolerance
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last
Three thoughts come to mind immediately:
  1. The private company who hired the lifeguard who broke the agreed-to rules, to save someone outside his area, is entirely within their rights to fire the individual, for disobeying a direct order that he acknowledged. Likewise the others who said they would do the same thing.

  2. The lifeguard did what any reasonable, caring human being would do -- especially one who is trained in the saving of lives -- under the circumstances. He did the right thing, even though it cost him his job. The others did right to have been honest and backed him.

  3. I would like to hope that in the same circumstances, I too would risk my job to save another human being in dire trouble.

So, IMO, it's a shame they lost their jobs, but they did the right thing and for the rest of their lives the lifeguard who saved the person will be comforted by that knowledge. The company has to find some more lifeguards, but they too did the right thing. Can't have employees running around doing stuff they specifically aren't supposed to do.

But the, IMO, the original agreement is what is flawed. I don't think it's reasonable to ask, or to agree, to watch another human being in trouble, suffer and die.

1 posted on 07/04/2012 3:58:43 PM PDT by dayglored
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dayglored

What happens in an out of control tort system where lawyers have no limits...


2 posted on 07/04/2012 4:03:26 PM PDT by 2banana (My common ground with terrorists - they want to die for islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

“The company has to find some more lifeguards, but they too did the right thing. “

The company did what their lawyers told them to do.


3 posted on 07/04/2012 4:03:36 PM PDT by Kirkwood (Zombie Hunter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kirkwood
> The company did what their lawyers told them to do.

Doubtless true.

The very same lawyers that required such a horrible restriction in the first place.

4 posted on 07/04/2012 4:05:52 PM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

Well, they may be within the provisions of their contract, but it sounds like Jeff Ellis and Associates need to be put out of business.


5 posted on 07/04/2012 4:07:25 PM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
> What happens in an out of control tort system where lawyers have no limits...

I wonder, if the lifeguard had stayed at his post, and the man had drowned, would the lifeguard, or his company, be sued successfully by (say) the man's family?

6 posted on 07/04/2012 4:07:43 PM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Truth29
> Well, they may be within the provisions of their contract,...

That's the (only) sense in which I meant that the company did the right thing by firing the lifeguard.

> ... but it sounds like Jeff Ellis and Associates need to be put out of business.

Or at least get some new/better lawyers.

7 posted on 07/04/2012 4:10:16 PM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dayglored
Actually, we have the trial lawyers to thank for this.
8 posted on 07/04/2012 4:10:47 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Government is the religion of the sociopath.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

Maybe they need a new rule that lawyers have to wear purple bathing suits, and lifeguards are not permitted to save them.


9 posted on 07/04/2012 4:11:20 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

He broke the rules of Jeff Ellis and Associates, the aquatic safety contractor.

Looks like to me he obeyed the rules that exist far above Jeff Ellis and Associates.

Perfect example of Matthew 6:20 and Tomas has nothing to worry about.

Nor do the other five.

On the other hand, J.E. and Asso.?

Not so good.

.


10 posted on 07/04/2012 4:11:45 PM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dayglored
It is really a no-win situation - isn't it?

And if the man gets hurt while being saved he can sue too.

And this is why our tort system is just crushing businesses. FYI - Trial Lawyers are some of the biggest campaign contributors with most of the money going to democrats.

I wonder, if the lifeguard had stayed at his post, and the man had drowned, would the lifeguard, or his company, be sued successfully by (say) the man's family?

11 posted on 07/04/2012 4:11:45 PM PDT by 2banana (My common ground with terrorists - they want to die for islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

I’m confused by the article.

First....”Lopez said he jumped into the water and “I double underhooked him....”

Then....”By the time Lopez arrived on the scene, other beachgoers had dragged the unconscious man ashore and started CPR....”

What exactly did Mr Lopez do?


12 posted on 07/04/2012 4:12:29 PM PDT by JoeDetweiler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Respectfully request consideration of a "Moral Absolutes" ping.

This isn't the usual "pro-life" situation, as it involves an adult rather than a baby. But all life is sacred in the eyes of God, and I think it raises a valid moral values issue.

Is a contract valid or morally defensible, that requires an individual to watch another human being suffer and die, when they are trained to save them?

Thanks for your consideration.

13 posted on 07/04/2012 4:15:12 PM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dayglored
"I wonder, if the lifeguard had stayed at his post, and the man had drowned, would the lifeguard, or his company, be sued successfully by (say) the man's family"

No more than they could successfully sue you for not saving him.


14 posted on 07/04/2012 4:16:57 PM PDT by I see my hands (It's time to.. KICK OUT THE JAMS, MOTHER FREEPERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dayglored
I wonder, if the lifeguard had stayed at his post, and the man had drowned, would the lifeguard, or his company, be sued successfully by (say) the man's family?
I don't know, but if someone would have drowned in his area while he was saving the other guy, I guarantee his company would have been sued.

Still think he did the right thing, though.

15 posted on 07/04/2012 4:20:48 PM PDT by Bratch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JoeDetweiler
> I’m confused by the article. First....”Lopez said he jumped into the water and “I double underhooked him....” Then....”By the time Lopez arrived on the scene, other beachgoers had dragged the unconscious man ashore and started CPR....” What exactly did Mr Lopez do?

Good question. Not particularly well-written description, or perhaps some stories got crossed -- there were four authors on this story and it may not have been edited properly. Hard to imagine doing CPR while the man is still in the water, though possibly he was in shallow water.

16 posted on 07/04/2012 4:22:05 PM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

Budget cuts force Calif. police and firemen to watch man drown

Posted on 06.1.11

Police and firemen in Alameda, California watched a man drown on Monday after realizing they did not have proper certifications for water rescue, leaving them open to possible lawsuits if they attempted to save him.

The drowning victim, 53-year-old Raymond Zack, was apparently suicidal, according to a report from the scene. He waded out about 150 yards into cold waters off Crown Beach in Alameda and took about an hour to drown himself.

A crowd of about 75 gathered to watch the bizarre scene, which saw police and firemen just standing at shoreline watching helplessly. After the man had drowned, authorities couldn’t even go into the surf to retrieve the body. They instead recruited a passer-by for the job.

City officials reportedly blamed the incident on budget cuts and said they would have a discussion about why Alameda, an island city, does not have proper authorization to rescue people from the waters surrounding it.

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/06/calif-police-and-firemen-watch-man-drown-due-to-budget-cuts/


17 posted on 07/04/2012 4:23:05 PM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Bratch
> ...if someone would have drowned in his area while he was saving the other guy, I guarantee his company would have been sued.

Precisely. And therein lies the reason the lawyers required the restriction, and set up the moral dilemma for the lifeguard.

18 posted on 07/04/2012 4:25:03 PM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012

That sounds a bit like the bunch that watched a man’s home burn down because he hadn’t paid the juice they required before putting it out.


19 posted on 07/04/2012 4:30:57 PM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dayglored

“Hallandale Beach is a city in Broward County, Florida”

Enough said!


20 posted on 07/04/2012 4:36:30 PM PDT by blueyon (The U. S. Constitution - read it and weep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-77 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson