"Guardian Angel" Hero forced to resign

#1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/7183017.stm

A brave volunteer coastguard has been forced to resign due to the stress of having to deal Health and Safety Zealots after he risked his life to save a young girl hanging from a cliff.

The MCA said it did not want "dead heroes."

What an utter shambles, brave volunteers who risk their lives to save others are being forced to go against their gut instincts to save lives in the name of Health and Safety. When they volunteer for these things they are well aware they may well put themselves in danger to save life, what utter rubbish.
 
#3
Bloody incredible. This bloke assessed the situation on the spot, relying on his skill and experience and conducted a successful rescue. He is then told by chairborne bureaucrats who have never risked anything more dangerous than a paper cut that he has done it wrong, and is harrassed for months because of it.

No wonder he told them to stick it.
 
#4
Apparently there are moves to scrap all armed services as its deemed too dangerous to fight wars as someone might get hurt.

Health and Safety Rules OK
 

mophead

Lantern Swinger
#5
Heath and Safety taken to it's stupid extremes....what was he supposed to do? go back for the kit,return to the scene and find a scared child has fallen to her death?He risk assessed the situation and decided that going to the girl was the least risk and now he has to leave a voluntry service he obviously love because some chair polisher in a nice safe office and no doubt drawing a nice salary doesn't like him volunteering to risk his life to save others.

Sorry for the rant but it makes my blood boil.
 
#6
I think the key word here is 'volunteer'.

If they were paying him they might have had a justification ot stick their oar in.
Would they have taken the blame if he had disappeared only to return and find her dead at the bottom of the cliff? It would have been him blaming himself for the rest of his life if she had died, he would have never forgiven himself knowing he 'could' have saved her.

Ironically, it was the second time Mr Waugh had saved Faye. The year before she became trapped by the tide while out with her cousins on a beach.
On a lighter note, perhaps she fancied him and could think of no other way to get him to notice her.
 

chieftiff

War Hero
Moderator
#8
Like so many organisations the MCA seem to have lost their way in the litigation led society which we have allowed to develop, the final statement from them say's it all really

"Above all our responsibility is to maintain the health and welfare of those who we sometimes ask to go out in difficult and challenging conditions to effect rescues."

Above all? So by definition they are saying that they aren't there to assist those who get into trouble, they therefore have set up a self perpetuating organisation who see themselves as there to look after themselves! Health and Safety is a good thing, it's there to protect people unfortunately it is often being used to defend stupid decisions by people who like to wrap us all up in cotton wool, not because they give a toss but just because they are scared, fear is power!
 
#9
Whilst I would agree that over application of H&S law is crippling all kinds of voluntary activities, I cant help but think that theres more to this story than meets the eye. I'm tempted to interpret this story as

Volunteer Coastguard turns up at cliff rescue leaving cliff rescue equipment in vehicle.(Surely in breach of SOP)
Volunteer improvises rescue, at unneccesary risk to self.
Volunteer enjoys (deserved) praise and adoration
MCA exercise duty of care investigaton as to why correct equipment is not used
Volunteer thrws bricks out of pram in fit of pique.

Perhaps I'm being a bit harsh on the fella, but if the attack AFFF turned up at the SOTI without an extinguisher, he'd still get a bollocking even if he had beat the fire out with his steaming bats! Its why we have SOPs.
 

chieftiff

War Hero
Moderator
#10
clanky said:
Whilst I would agree that over application of H&S law is crippling all kinds of voluntary activities, I cant help but think that theres more to this story than meets the eye. I'm tempted to interpret this story as

Volunteer Coastguard turns up at cliff rescue leaving cliff rescue equipment in vehicle.(Surely in breach of SOP)
Volunteer improvises rescue, at unneccesary risk to self.
Volunteer enjoys (deserved) praise and adoration
MCA exercise duty of care investigaton as to why correct equipment is not used
Volunteer thrws bricks out of pram in fit of pique.

Perhaps I'm being a bit harsh on the fella, but if the attack AFFF turned up at the SOTI without an extinguisher, he'd still get a bollocking even if he had beat the fire out with his steaming bats! Its why we have SOPs.
I agree we are only hearing one side of this story and as ever I'm sure the journalist has taken the more controversial view but, it could equally have been interpreted like this:

Volunteer turns up at cliff rescue
Makes on the spot decision that there is insufficient time due to a rapidly deteriorating situation to wait for assistance iaw SOP
Unselfishly risks his own life by assessing that rescue is within his own capability
Everyone goes home alive and happy smoking big fat cigars.
MCA H&S wallah gets shitty on because he spent days writing SOP's and takes it out on guy who proved SOP's were not necessarily rigorous.
Hero says ram it up your hoop jobsworth.

We may well never know :thumright:
 
#13
chieftiff said:
clanky said:
Whilst I would agree that over application of H&S law is crippling all kinds of voluntary activities, I cant help but think that theres more to this story than meets the eye. I'm tempted to interpret this story as

Volunteer Coastguard turns up at cliff rescue leaving cliff rescue equipment in vehicle.(Surely in breach of SOP)
Volunteer improvises rescue, at unneccesary risk to self.
Volunteer enjoys (deserved) praise and adoration
MCA exercise duty of care investigaton as to why correct equipment is not used
Volunteer thrws bricks out of pram in fit of pique.

Perhaps I'm being a bit harsh on the fella, but if the attack AFFF turned up at the SOTI without an extinguisher, he'd still get a bollocking even if he had beat the fire out with his steaming bats! Its why we have SOPs.
I agree we are only hearing one side of this story and as ever I'm sure the journalist has taken the more controversial view but, it could equally have been interpreted like this:

Volunteer turns up at cliff rescue
Makes on the spot decision that there is insufficient time due to a rapidly deteriorating situation to wait for assistance iaw SOP
Unselfishly risks his own life by assessing that rescue is within his own capability
Everyone goes home alive and happy smoking big fat cigars.
MCA H&S wallah gets shitty on because he spent days writing SOP's and takes it out on guy who proved SOP's were not necessarily rigorous.
Hero says ram it up your hoop jobsworth.

We may well never know :thumright:
Perhaps not so much H&S but compensation and insurance, the 'volunteers' and the MCA have been having a bit of headbanging over insurance cover to the extent some volunteers went on 'strike' last year. I suspect this falling out has perhaps more to do with this discontent that H&S rules themselves.
 

Similar threads

New Posts