Lifeguard fired after participating in beach rescue

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
47
48
66
As lifeguards are paid and trained to do, Tomas Lopez rushed down the beach to rescue a drowning man — and then got fired for it.

The problem: Lopez stepped out of the beach zone his company is paid to patrol, a supervisor said Tuesday.

"I ran out to do the job I was trained to do," said Lopez, 21, of Davie. "I didn't think about it at all."

At least two other lifeguards have quit in protest.

"What was he supposed to do? Watch a man drown?" asked one, Szilard Janko.

Lifeguards in Hallandale Beach work for Orlando-based company Jeff Ellis and Associates, which has been providing lifeguard services for the city's beaches and pools since 2003.

Company officials on Tuesday said Lopez broke a rule that could've put beachgoers in his designated area in jeopardy. The firm could ultimately have been sued, officials said.

"We have liability issues and can't go out of the protected area," said supervisor Susan Ellis. "What he did was his own decision. He knew the company rules and did what he thought he needed to do."

Lopez said he was sitting at his post at about 1:45 p.m. Monday when someone rushed to his stand asking for help. Lopez said he noticed a man struggling in the water south of his post. The man was previously swimming in an "unprotected" stretch of the beach, city officials confirmed Tuesday.

"It was a long run, but someone needed my help. I wasn't going to say no," he said.

Company officials said the rescue took place about 1,500 feet south of the company's protective boundaries. The unprotected area has signs alerting beachgoers to swim at their own risk.

By the time Lopez arrived, several witnesses had pulled the unidentified man out of the water. Lopez said the man appeared semi-conscious and had water in his lungs.

Lopez said he and a off-duty nurse attended to the man until the city's paramedics arrived.

The man, whose identity was not released because of medical privacy laws, was taken to Aventura Hospital, where he remained in the intensive care unit Tuesday, said city spokesman Peter Dobens.

After the incident, Lopez said his boss asked him to fill out an incident report. His boss then fired him for leaving his assigned area.
"They didn't tell me in a bad way. It was more like they were sorry, but rules are rules," Lopez said. "I couldn't believe what was happening."

Lopez became a lifeguard four months ago after passing the company's requirements, which include swimming and physical exams. The job pays $8.25 an hour, the lifeguards said.

Company officials said other lifeguards watched over Lopez's area during the rescue and were on the phone with 911 operators.
"The beach remained protected at all times," Ellis said.

She added that the firing and the resignations will not affect manpower during the Fourth of July holiday.

City administrators declined to comment Tuesday, indicating that the firing was a personnel decision made by a private company.
City Mayor Joy Cooper was out of town and could not be reached for comment. Commissioners Keith London and Alexander Lewy each said Tuesday they had not heard of the incident.

Hallandale Beach began outsourcing its lifeguards in 2003 as a money-saving measure. The city pays the company about $334,000 annually to provide four lifeguards and one supervisor at the beach year-round, said Dobens. The company also provides lifeguard services at the city's pools as part of the contract.

The company's contract expires this year.

Tuesday, Lopez acknowledged breaking a rule, but said he would do it again if the situation called for it.

"It was the moral thing to do," Lopez said. "I would never pick a job over my morals."



Lifeguard fired for helping in beach rescue in Hallandale Beach - South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com



Hallandale Beach lifeguard's firing prompts outcry, review


Executives of an aquatics company will review whether the firm was justified in firing a Hallandale Beach lifeguard earlier this week for leaving his zone to help rescue a nearby swimmer.

The dismissal prompted a media firestorm and an outpouring of public support for the guard, 21-year-old Tomas Lopez of Davie.

Jeff Ellis Management, the Orlando-area company under contract with Hallandale Beach since 2003 to provide lifeguards at two public beaches, announced Wednesday that it would immediately interview the managers and workers involved in the incident to determine whether any safety protocols were violated.

"If we find our actions on the part of the leadership team were inappropriate, we will rectify it based upon the information that comes forward," the firm's owner, Jeff Ellis, said in a phone interview from Houston, where he was traveling.


Lopez was fired Monday after he was summoned to help a man who had been struggling in the water south of his station. The man had been at an "unprotected" stretch of the beach, where visitors are warned to swim at their own risk, city officials said.

Compelled to help, Lopez said he ran a considerable distance, arriving to find that several witnesses had pulled the man, a 21-year-old from Estonia, out of the ocean. Lopez and an off-duty nurse tended to the victim until paramedics arrived. The victim was reported in good condition Wednesday at Aventura Hospital.

Company officials said the rescue occurred about 1,500 feet south of the firm's boundaries.

Two other lifeguards quit in protest of Lopez's firing.

City Manager Renee Crichton issued a statement Wednesday saying, "We do not have all the facts in this case. We take the safety of all visitors to our beaches very seriously. Whether they are in a protected area or unprotected area, we believe aid must be rendered."
The city said it would await the results of the company's inquiry, which Ellis said should be complete by Friday.

City spokesman Peter Dobens said the agreement for the protected areas of the beach calls for four lifeguards and one supervisor to be on duty simultaneously, per shift.

"The city doesn't provide lifeguards in front of the condominiums up and down the beach," Dobens said. Emergency service personnel, however, respond whenever summoned.

While he does not doubt that Lopez was "good intentioned," Ellis said the company's first responsibility is to ensure that service for its zone is not disrupted, potentially endangering beachgoers there and opening up the company to liability issues.

"We are not a fire-rescue operation. We are strictly a lifeguard organization," he said. "We limit what we do to the protected swimming zones that we've agreed to service."

Firing of Hallandale Beach lifeguard prompts outcry and review - South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
That does bring up an interesting conundrum. 'Swim at your own risk' means what? Not that you can leave a man to drown, but that definitely emphasizes the problem. People deliberately swim in an unprotected area, but then expect help when they get into trouble. Kinda like not buying insurance, but then expecting to get covered if something happens.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
5
36
London, Ontario
If he had 'obeyed the rules' and said "Sorry, it outside the bounds of where I'm allowed to save people" I can just imagine the hellstorm of public fury that would have rained down upon him, the private company that paid him, and the city. This will get turned around, it will be a public relations nightmare if it doesn't.

Out of curiosity what, if any, are the requirements to provide assistance if you are trained to do so? I know there are good samaritan laws (in some places)that protect someone who is being helpful from lawsuits resulting from unintended consequences but is there anything that requires you to do something if you can? Aside from basic compassion and human decency that is.
 

Niflmir

A modern nomad
Dec 18, 2006
3,460
58
48
Leiden, the Netherlands
What happens when you are swimming in the protected area, start to drown, and the current pulls you outside of the protected area?

"Not my job anymore. Act of nature."
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
I knew they would. Good for him for not taking it though.

I'm astounded, although I shouldn't be, that people in charge of the lives and safety of others only warrants $8.25 an hour!

Hey, it's the market economy. The big money goes to people who provide really important services like the Kardasians.
 

shadowshiv

Dark Overlord
May 29, 2007
17,545
120
63
52
Out of the prescribed area or not, what is more important? The fact that you may get sued or the fact that if you are able to save someone's life? Good for him for staying true to his morals. I wouldn't want the job back after that(since it's obvious where the company's view really lie) either.

And with regards to the fellow swimming in an "unprotected" area, who's to say that he didn't get stuck in a current/undertow and get swept down there? Regardless of whether the guy chose to swim in that area or not, the lifeguard shouldn't be punished for deciding that he wanted to save a life(or at least attempt to).
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
5
36
London, Ontario
Hey, it's the market economy. The big money goes to people who provide really important services like the Kardasians.

As long as there are idiots willing to dish out their hard earned cash for other idiots like the Kardasians, we will continue to underpay those individuals who actually save lives I suppose. What a fracked up world we live in!

Out of the prescribed area or not, what is more important? The fact that you may get sued or the fact that if you are able to save someone's life? Good for him for staying true to his morals. I wouldn't want the job back after that(since it's obvious where the company's view really lie) either.

It is nice to see, despite all this entitled youth we see walking around who need their iPhones, that there are still some younger people who will do the right thing. Got to respect him for that!
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
In legal terms the employer had every right to fire the lifeguard. It all comes down to liability and we all know that the US is a lawsuit friendly nation. The same is true on every ski hill in Canada for the same reasons. Been through that. FIrst the lifeguard left the area he looks after leaving the customers unprotected. Working outside his area also negated any insurance coverage for himself.
The proper thing to do if he is a good lifeguard would be to fire him for legal reasons then quietly hire him back later.

I should add that what ski patrol do outside of their working hours is of no conciquence legally.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
As long as there are idiots willing to dish out their hard earned cash for other idiots like the Kardasians, we will continue to underpay those individuals who actually save lives I suppose. What a fracked up world we live in!

Actually the high incomes of entertainers and similar types is one of the weaknesses of the market economy. Pure market systems tend to accidentally or intentionally distort values

Don't get me wrong, the market system has many advantages, but there is little doubt that it often encourages people to purchase products that are utterly useless or of marginal value, while discouraging them from spending money n more useful areas.
 

shadowshiv

Dark Overlord
May 29, 2007
17,545
120
63
52
In legal terms the employer had every right to fire the lifeguard. It all comes down to liability and we all know that the US is a lawsuit friendly nation. The same is true on every ski hill in Canada for the same reasons. Been through that. FIrst the lifeguard left the area he looks after leaving the customers unprotected. Working outside his area also negated any insurance coverage for himself.
The proper thing to do if he is a good lifeguard would be to fire him for legal reasons then quietly hire him back later.

I should add that what ski patrol do outside of their working hours is of no conciquence legally.

I believe(but could be mistaken) that the article stated that there were other lifeguards that stayed in his area while he went to save the drowning man, so the area wasn't left unprotected.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
5
36
London, Ontario
In legal terms the employer had every right to fire the lifeguard. It all comes down to liability and we all know that the US is a lawsuit friendly nation. The same is true on every ski hill in Canada for the same reasons. Been through that. FIrst the lifeguard left the area he looks after leaving the customers unprotected. Working outside his area also negated any insurance coverage for himself.
The proper thing to do if he is a good lifeguard would be to fire him for legal reasons then quietly hire him back later.

I should add that what ski patrol do outside of their working hours is of no conciquence legally.

Legally speaking they may have had a right to but it becomes a P.R. nightmare for the company and for the city. And it was stated that the area was not left unprotected, there were other lifeguards who were aware of what he was going to do.

You can have limits and boundaries for what you are required to do but when you see a human being in distress you can't just turn your back. To me this is no different than a store clerk rushing out of the front door of the store to aide someone in distress on the sidewalk. Somethings just take precedent over work responsibilities, saving a life would be one of them.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
I believe(but could be mistaken) that the article stated that there were other lifeguards that stayed in his area while he went to save the drowning man, so the area wasn't left unprotected.

Doesn't matter from a legal perspective. This is where the problem arises. Lawyers.

Legally speaking they may have had a right to but it becomes a P.R. nightmare for the company and for the city. And it was stated that the area was not left unprotected, there were other lifeguards who were aware of what he was going to do.

You can have limits and boundaries for what you are required to do but when you see a human being in distress you can't just turn your back. To me this is no different than a store clerk rushing out of the front door of the store to aide someone in distress on the sidewalk. Somethings just take precedent over work responsibilities, saving a life would be one of them.

Nope. I went through all this in great detail when working on a ski hill because I was sort of management. It is really cut and dried. One step outside the ski boundary is a no go zone. Like I said it is all to do with lawyers and liabilities.
 

SLM

The Velvet Hammer
Mar 5, 2011
29,151
5
36
London, Ontario
Doesn't matter from a legal perspective. This is where the problem arises. Lawyers.



Nope. I went through all this in great detail when working on a ski hill because I was sort of management. It is really cut and dried. One step outside the ski boundary is a no go zone. Like I said it is all to do with lawyers and liabilities.

Oh I'm not disagreeing in terms of legal liabilities. Lawyers and insurance companies right?

But from a moral/ethical standpoint, the legal perspective in this kind of situation just doesn't jive. Saving this man's life was, morally, the right thing to do.
 

Liberalman

Senate Member
Mar 18, 2007
5,623
36
48
Toronto
But from a moral/ethical standpoint, the legal perspective in this kind of situation just doesn't jive. Saving this man's life was, morally, the right thing to do.

The life guard left the beach unprotected to save another he should have been fired and the person who was saved should be sued for damages