Lifeguard fired after participating in beach rescue

[SLM]

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

No, he did not leave it unprotected.

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.

He was fired, that was actually the point of the article that you didn't bother to read. Also it's in the thread title. No one is disputing the legal and/or contractual obligations involved in terms of what he should or shouldn't have done.

What it really boils down to is the moral and ethical standpoint. Which I assume must be a foreign concept since you think they should be suing a man who almost lost his life for something that could have, but did not happen, and in fact wouldn't have happened as the beach was not left unattended at all.

 

[Liberalman]

No, he did not leave it unprotected.



He was fired, that was actually the point of the article that you didn't bother to read. Also it's in the thread title. No one is disputing the legal and/or contractual obligations involved in terms of what he should or shouldn't have done.

What it really boils down to is the moral and ethical standpoint. Which I assume must be a foreign concept since you think they should be suing a man who almost lost his life for something that could have, but did not happen, and in fact wouldn't have happened as the beach was not left unattended at all.

You needed a certain number of lifeguards to protect the beach and the remaining lifeguards was watching the rescue attempt by the lifeguard thus not properly protecting the beach as I said he should have been fired.

 

[SLM]

You needed a certain number of lifeguards to protect the beach and the remaining lifeguards was watching the rescue attempt by the lifeguard thus not properly protecting the beach as I said he should have been fired.

It would be no different than had someone been in distress in the waters off of their own beach and the remaining lifeguard had been on the phone with 911.

Do explain why it would be important necessary to sue the man who almost drowned.

 

[Liberalman]

Do explain why it would be important necessary to sue the man who almost drowned.

He took the risk and should be charged for his action for putting other peoples life in jeopardy for his stupid actions.

 

[taxslave]

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.

Morally right as opposed to legal right can cost you a whole pile of money in court. That is the problem. It is no different than a firefighter taking off into a burning building on his own to rescue someone. That would be grounds for dismissal for the same reasons.

 

[SLM]

Morally right as opposed to legal right can cost you a whole pile of money in court. That is the problem. It is no different than a firefighter taking off into a burning building on his own to rescue someone. That would be grounds for dismissal for the same reasons.

So in that scenario, the off duty fire fighter remains outside the burning building but a good samaritan goes in. It makes less sense for an untrained individual to be going in there, it increases the possibility of two lives now being in danger more so than if the professional fire fighter went in.

I completely understand the reality of what you are saying, I don't dispute the legalities of it. All I'm saying is, when you stop and think about it in these scenarios, it's pretty effed up.

 

[TenPenny]

He took the risk and should be charged for his action for putting other peoples life in jeopardy for his stupid actions.

You often post comments that make it seem like you are an idiot. Do you do this deliberately?

 

[taxslave]

So in that scenario, the off duty fire fighter remains outside the burning building but a good samaritan goes in. It makes less sense for an untrained individual to be going in there, it increases the possibility of two lives now being in danger more so than if the professional fire fighter went in.

I completely understand the reality of what you are saying, I don't dispute the legalities of it. All I'm saying is, when you stop and think about it in these scenarios, it's pretty effed up.

When liars are involved common sense is the first thing that gets lost.