EMTs Suspended After Refusing to Help Dying Woman

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Dan02

I don't think his point was that what they did was right, but what would you do if someone asked you to do part of your job while you're on break? Okay maybe you're the exception to the rule but most people would tell em to shove it.

I've never understood why "on break" is so sacred, and I don't think most people would tell them to shove it, especially in a life and death situation.

In my experience, the people who are most adamant that their 15 minutes of smoking go uninterrupted (even if it means losing business) are generally the worst slackers.

[simonsays]

I don't know what kind of jobs some of you have, but if there's work that needs doing now you do it, break or no break. There will be other breaks, and some of them won't have time sensitive situations to deal with. This doesn't even have anything to do with saving lives.

But the idea that uniformed EMTs chose to ignore their (fairly important) job to continue their break is pretty jaw dropping. They chose to be ignorant union lackeys instead of choosing to be hero's? Insane. That's some pretty criminal negligence right there.

[csnarpy]

As a former Physician Assistant (like a paramedic) in the military, if this was ever to happen I'd/you'd be charged and court-martialed in a heartbeat. As a health worker it is illegal not to help someone in need and their actions are just morally disgusting.

[I wanna be like Miikka]

As someone in the medical profession, one of the things you have to understand when you take on the job is that you don't have a break like that. If you go on vacation and someone has a problem and needs emergency help then you have to respond. It is part of being a professional and also part of the profession. The acts of these people are NOT justifiable.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by flameswin

I'm siding with the EMT workers here. If they are on their break, which they are legally entitled to, then I don't see any problem with them directing people to phone 911 instead. It sucks that in their profession, it cost someone their life, but technically it's no different then a walmart worker directing a customer to ask another worker for help if that worker is walking by with lunch in his hand on the way to the break room.

And people wonder why so many are hostile towards unions and the attitude they breed.

[jayswin]

^^^^^^

Did you read the whole thread?

[TheU]

dont try asnd back peddle now

[Deegee]

Originally Posted by Dan02

I don't think his point was that what they did was right, but what would you do if someone asked you to do part of your job while you're on break? Okay maybe you're the exception to the rule but most people would tell em to shove it.

I think you would find most people would jump to serve someone if they even remotely like their job.

I know if I don't assist them when they need it, they move on to the next place to get the services they need and I could lose out on a potentially long lasting relationship.

My clients are also all in a small village of about 200 so if I blow it the entire village and surrounding farmers all know about it. My staff all have the same mentality as me or at least act on my mentality in a convincing fashion.

I think the exception is actually choosing to stay on your break rather than help out.

[OilKiller]

I really don't know how those two could live with themselves after something like this. I really don't...If I had done something this amazingly stupid, I would never be able to sleep again.

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by flameswin

I'm siding with the EMT workers here. If they are on their break, which they are legally entitled to, then I don't see any problem with them directing people to phone 911 instead. It sucks that in their profession, it cost someone their life, but technically it's no different then a walmart worker directing a customer to ask another worker for help if that worker is walking by with lunch in his hand on the way to the break room.

Originally Posted by peter12

This is probably on a par with the most soul-less, disgusting thing I have ever read.

Originally Posted by Table 5

The only way this is justifiable is if they are off-duty from being human beings.

Originally Posted by Dion

Ahem......

Accordng to a union representative, there is no such thing as a responsibility-free break during which citizens are either not allowed to need medical aid or EMTs are not required to aid them. Medics have a resposibility to help those in need when they are in-uniform, and their refusal to attend to Rennix constituted an "act of abandonment."

http://washingtontimes.com/weblogs/w...ke-sure-its-n/

Originally Posted by peter12

If my job was to save lives and a pregnant woman goes down in front of me, I chose to save her life over having my bacon and egger. Anything else is close to murder in my opinion.

Originally Posted by flameswin

It was just my attempt at humor, as any thread on CP ends up in a debate even if everyone should be on the same side, as should be the case with this thread.

Originally Posted by Dion

If i'm an EMT or GP i'd jump in and help any way I could.

Originally Posted by kirant

I think the major factor here is the human life at risk. I agree, in most cases, you wouldn't do your job on a break, but when a life is at stake, most people (at least the ones I know) would try to help as best they can.

Originally Posted by Ace Handy

Agreed. You can't compare an EMT to a Walmart greeter. Walking away from someone whose life is in danger, that you could possibly save, is a little different than not helping them find bad jeans.

I'm assuming they're unionized, this will be interesting.

Originally Posted by Shazam

Well, there's the whole having a break thing, and then there's the thing about saving human lives. I can see the trouble that people are having in assessing which is more important.

Originally Posted by valo403

Technically, it's completely different.

Originally Posted by DrPepper

Doesn't matter if your on break... Customers or in this case a Patient ALWAYS comes first. So what if you wasted 5-10 minutes of your break just to help someone out, it gives you and/or your organization a good name.

I hope they die and nobody bothers to help them out and see how they feel. Karma will get to them sooner or later.

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I've never understood why "on break" is so sacred, and I don't think most people would tell them to shove it, especially in a life and death situation.

In my experience, the people who are most adamant that their 15 minutes of smoking go uninterrupted (even if it means losing business) are generally the worst slackers.

Originally Posted by simonsays

I don't know what kind of jobs some of you have, but if there's work that needs doing now you do it, break or no break. There will be other breaks, and some of them won't have time sensitive situations to deal with. This doesn't even have anything to do with saving lives.

But the idea that uniformed EMTs chose to ignore their (fairly important) job to continue their break is pretty jaw dropping. They chose to be ignorant union lackeys instead of choosing to be hero's? Insane. That's some pretty criminal negligence right there.

Originally Posted by MarchHare

And people wonder why so many are hostile towards unions and the attitude they breed.

Originally Posted by TheU

dont try asnd back peddle now

Originally Posted by flameswin

^^^^^^

Did you read the whole thread?

Settle down you guys! Holy crap, flameswin was so obviously kidding and it was funny.

It's almost like we need a "hottest CNN story of the minute" thread so people can quit refreshing CNN to be the first to post a sensational story in CP as a new thread.

This is one of those threads that EVERYBODY is going to read and say the usual "OMG that's terrible" crap and then thank eachother a bunch of times.

Hat's off to flameswin for making it interesting.

[mykalberta]

Are EMTs in NYC private contractors or paid by the city? Since they were susupended without pay they likely have no union so I am thinking the are private contractors. In which case would they get paid for going to help. What if they finished a 12 hour shift, and they are having lunch, should they then interrupt their break to go what is likely in NYC a prank or wasteful call?

This is obviously the 1/10 chance that the woman dies - I would need more information about work rules etc of NYC EMt before I condem them. What Mayor Bloomberg says carries no weight with me as he is looking for a soundbite and nothing more.

[ooogabooga]

As someone, who is an EMT student, at least in Canada, our laws state that if your on duty (including breaks because it's nearly impossible to distinguish which is a paid or un-paid break) you are obligated, and required to help someone. If we are practicing on a person, while on shift we are fully covered by all of the laws protecting first responders, and also by the provincial governing body. I mean even in retail I helped hundreds of people on my break, I wouldn't fathom how in good conscience as an EMT you would not help someone in need, on break or not.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Settle down you guys! Holy crap, flameswin was so obviously kidding and it was funny.

Eh, it seems like as soon as someone get's flamed on for a comment these days, they bring out the "lol I was just kidding, didn't you know? rofl you are stoopid" card to save their own ass.

Sure didn't seem like a joke to me. Jokes usually contain some sort of humorous element.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by ooogabooga

As someone, who is an EMT student, at least in Canada, our laws state that if your on duty (including breaks because it's nearly impossible to distinguish which is a paid or un-paid break) you are obligated, and required to help someone. If we are practicing on a person, while on shift we are fully covered by all of the laws protecting first responders, and also by the provincial governing body. I mean even in retail I helped hundreds of people on my break, I wouldn't fathom how in good conscience as an EMT you would not help someone in need, on break or not.

You also dont live or work in one of the largest most obnoxious cities on earth. I need to hear the EMTs side of this before condem them. There is alot of stuff to consider, jurisdiction, malpractice insurance etc.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Are EMTs in NYC private contractors or paid by the city? Since they were susupended without pay they likely have no union so I am thinking the are private contractors. In which case would they get paid for going to help. What if they finished a 12 hour shift, and they are having lunch, should they then interrupt their break to go what is likely in NYC a prank or wasteful call?

This is obviously the 1/10 chance that the woman dies - I would need more information about work rules etc of NYC EMt before I condem them. What Mayor Bloomberg says carries no weight with me as he is looking for a soundbite and nothing more.

EMT's are part of the FDNY, they work for the city and have union representation.

And why is a call in NYC likely to be a prank or wasteful? Any basis for that or just making things up?

[valo403]

From the FDNY/EMS FAQ page:

Do I get a lunch or meal hour?

Answer: No. EMTs and Paramedics do not have a dedicated meal hour. They are financially compensated for a half-hour lunch period. This is incorporated in your bi-weekly paycheck

[Sliver]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Eh, it seems like as soon as someone get's flamed on for a comment these days, they bring out the "lol I was just kidding, didn't you know? rofl you are stoopid" card to save their own ass.

Sure didn't seem like a joke to me. Jokes usually contain some sort of humorous element.

Correction, successful jokes contain some sort of a humorous element. I would classify this as an unsuccessful joke.

What made me laugh was the unintended comedy stemming from the failed joke, which was a bunch of people piling on and thanking each other for cracking flameswin after he said he was joking. IMO, it is so obvious the EMTs should have helped (given what we know which is basically nothing) that it isn't even worth saying.

[mikey_the_redneck]

Couldn't they just take their break after delivering the baby?

...or maybe the bacon n' egger wouldn't look so good after delivering a baby?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Sliver

Correction, successful jokes contain some sort of a humorous element. I would classify this as an unsuccessful joke.

What made me laugh was the unintended comedy stemming from the failed joke, which was a bunch of people piling on and thanking each other for cracking flameswin after he said he was joking. IMO, it is so obvious the EMTs should have helped (given what we know which is basically nothing) that it isn't even worth saying.

I didn't know they made tandem backpedal bicycles

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by valo403

EMT's are part of the FDNY, they work for the city and have union representation.

And why is a call in NYC likely to be a prank or wasteful? Any basis for that or just making things up?

Wasteful meaning a drunk/drug enduced calls etc. The city has 10 mil people - everyone here is taking a holier than though attitude and they know only a part of the story.

Hard to believe they have union representation, one would think in one of the 2 largest liberal cities in the USA that their union would at least get them suspension with pay.