Not that we know all the details, but it sounds like this guy is getting a pretty raw deal. Kinda interesting though...in our CG, if there is true and imminent danger to life, and you break/bend policies in an effort to preserve that life: if you succeed you are praised, but if you fail you are tossed into the fire and made an example of. I can think of at least 2 major rescues over the last year where written policy was clearly breeched, but life was saved, and heros were rewarded (and rightfully so).



ITN - Saturday, January 12 06:48 pmA coastguard who risked his life to save a teenage girl has quit after bosses criticised him over a breach in health and safety.

Volunteer coastguard Paul Waugh, 44, climbed down a cliff without safety equipment in gale force winds to rescue Faye Harrison, 13, who had become trapped on a cliff ledge.

Mr Waugh, from Skelton Green, in east Cleveland, won a string of awards for his bravery last January.

But bosses at the Maritime and Coastguard Agency said that Mr Waugh had breached health and safety regulations by not using safety equipment and said it did not want any "dead heroes".

After 13 years of dedicated work as a volunteer coastguard, Mr Waugh claims he was forced to quit the job.

Mr Waugh, who is a married father-of-three, said: "I am very sad that I have had to leave because I loved my job but it is one of those things.

"You save a life and this is how they treat you. I am sorry but I would not leave any 13-year-old girl hanging off a cliff. Saving her life was the important thing."

The ex-miner gave up as a volunteer last week blaming "immense pressure" from Coastguard management for his decision.

Mr Waugh added: "I broke a rule and did not use the kit but I saved a life. I don't call myself a hero. I would have helped even if I had not been in the Coastguard.

"If I had done nothing I would have got slated but I saved her life and I still get slated."

Faye, now 14, from Saltburn-by-the-sea, east Cleveland, told a local newspaper: "I am disgusted by the way Paul has been treated.

"If he hadn't been brave enough to climb down to me I don't think I would be here today. I was terrified and started thinking about my funeral. Paul is a hero."

A spokesman for the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) said: "We wish Paul well in his future endeavours and the MCA is very grateful for his past activities and work in the Coastguard Rescue Service.

"However, the MCA is very mindful of health and safety regulations which are in place for very good reasons.

"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 affect rescues. The MCA is not looking for dead heroes.

"As such we ask our volunteers to risk assess the situations they and the injured or distressed person find themselves in, and to ensure that whatever action they take does not put anyone in further danger.

"We are proud of our safety record and we will seek to maintain the safety of our volunteers, and minimise risk in what can be inherently difficult situations."

quote:

"As such we ask our volunteers to risk assess the situations they and the injured or distressed person find themselves in, and to ensure that whatever action they take does not put anyone in further danger.

Again, we dont have the details. But it sounds like the risk was thoroughly assessed, and that it equated to the imminent loss of a 13 year old girl. Shes alive, and the crew is safe. Risk assessment worked.

Since MCA is a volunteer organization, they are in CYA mode over any future liability of other Coastguardmen who may not follow the letter of the regs. Same mindset of firing someone at 7/11 who fights a thief. Our legal system makes such emergency decisions biased towards the organization, not the individual.

Doesn't the USCG 41 UTB have a sea limitation of 8' seas? Haven't most of us Cox'ns been told, "it's your call" when responding to a major SAR case?

Hmmmmmm.

Don

Well what could have happened is that the rescuer also gets stuck on the rock without a fixed line and now you have two people to rescue. I'm guessing, but if he has a kit, it;s best to use it.
Peace,
Dick

Always remember, no good deed goes unpunished.

Absolutly Pat. It a shame they couldn't keep this $hit behind closed doors.
Peace,
Dick

Well done, Mr. Waugh !

Great Britain is quickly becoming the nanny state. In addition, they suffer from what's called "jobsworth", where public servants aren't willing to go the extra mile, or minor rules and regulations are stringently enforced to give power to every level of government employee. (Like a clerk at the DMV using rules to be high and mightly.)

The examples are endless. A homeowner fined for slipping a recyclable bottle into the regular trash.

A waterfront homeowner fined for sweeping up sand that has blown from the beach across the street during a windstorm, and depositing it back on the beach. He was told he was "littering" the beach.

Bobbies discipined for pursuing two teenagers on bicycles who were breaking car and business windows. The "children" may have been injured in the pursuit because they weren't wearing helmets.

It's mindless bureaucrats enforcing the letter of the law because that's what gives them power.

For example, here's a few stories from the UK's Daily Mail that pop up under a search for "jobsworth."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/dmsearch/overture.html...ry=jobsworth&siteOr=

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Brian_Jordan,

A link to the Daily Mail's story with photos. If you take the time to read the comments at the bottom, you'll see a reference or two to "jobsworth."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/new...d=true#StartComments

quote:

Originally posted by 21yrsUSCGUSCS:
Doesn't the USCG 41 UTB have a sea limitation of 8' seas? Haven't most of us Cox'ns been told, "it's your call" when responding to a major SAR case?

Hmmmmmm.

Don

Exactly. With the "you have to go out but dont have to come back" mentality being a thing of the past, there is still "gray area" when it comes to acceptable risk.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Jason_Greene,

Hrm. I took a 25' RBS out in about 30kts wind once....WX forecast came up right before we left on a PIW case, trying to beat the slow 47' on scene....I did not catch the jump in WX before we left. The day was NICE before then.

Boy, was the CO mad....waiting on the dock when I got back......with a severely hypothermic man who lived

That survivor saved my hide that day....had we not got him......well....I might have been like the poor fellow in this story.


On a side note.....DANG the little cabin heater on the RBS works GOOD when you need it to!

Chris,
Thats just the lid I am looking for to wear surfing on the big days.
Peace,
Dick

This discussion made me think of the USCG rescue swimmers that go in after a PIW even though sharks are clearly visible in the immediate area.

Man, adrenaline is a wonderful thing sometimes but seeing a huge shark lingering nearby....I might need a shove out of the helo!

Don

I would think the prop wash, blade turbulence, and noise would drive the beast away. It always turned the bite off when a h3 would set down in Blue lake while I was fishing in Sitka Alaska.
Who would have though rainbows liked cooked shrimp!
Peace,
Dick

quote:

Originally posted by 21yrsUSCGUSCS:
Doesn't the USCG 41 UTB have a sea limitation of 8' seas? Haven't most of us Cox'ns been told, "it's your call" when responding to a major SAR case?

Hmmmmmm.

Don

and many of us can start listing the names of dead Coasties that sucumbed to this. That is why it is NOT the COXNs call anymore (to exceed standards.) The COXN of course can still say no, but in cases past the established standards, he can not be the one to say yes. It is absoloutely abhorent to me to even consider putting that on the head of a COXN. That is the things that OinCs/COs and Sec CDRs get paid for. You don't put a junior person in that place of wondering do I risk it or let them die. You know which way they will tend to lean.

and many of us can start listing the names of dead Coasties that sucumbed to this. That is why it is NOT the COXNs call anymore (to exceed standards.) The COXN of course can still say no, but in cases past the established standards, he can not be the one to say yes. It is absoloutely abhorent to me to even consider putting that on the head of a COXN. That is the things that OinCs/COs and Sec CDRs get paid for. You don't put a junior person in that place of wondering do I risk it or let them die. You know which way they will tend to lean.[/QUOTE]

That's what was so nice about being a Vessel Commander with CBP. The guys back in the offices actually trusted us to make the call. Running to Bimini, Grand Bahama, Cay Sal in a 40' boat was very common, even in very rough seas....no one died.

Sometimes, you just have to trust the training and experience of your coxswains.

In case a lack of trust is about the average age of a USCG Coxswain, I recall a young 20 yr old Navy pilot who flew missions to bomb Japanese Islands during WW II....hmmm, what was his name....oh ya, George H.W. Bush.

Don

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 21yrsUSCGUSCS,

Don - with your background you should clearly see the apples and oranges of your point.

APPLES: Do I ignore the clearly mandated safe operating limits of my vessel (myself??) when I percieve a life might be in danger? How does the public's expectations and the endangered person's expectations wiegh in? What other options are available? Who is worth more, me or them? Where does the risk vs gain lie?

ORANGES: Do I run to Bimini in bumpy seas for ______?

Yes - much of that is up to the Coxn normally. BUT - a line must be drawn in the sand at some point where the COXN doesn't get to make that call. We call that line, safe operating limits. The coxn can ALWAYS turn down a mission and decide NOT to risk his life and his crews'. Once that line is hit, the decision that it is worth the risk to exceed those limits rightfully falls above the COXN.

Further, in response to a CBP chain of command, there is obvioulsy a MUCH, MUCH higher personal and even criminal level of culpability up a Military Chain of Command than a CIV/LEO chain of command.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mightyz90_93:
Don - with your background you should clearly see the apples and oranges of your point.

APPLES: Do I ignore the clearly mandated safe operating limits of my vessel (myself??) when I percieve a life might be in danger? How does the public's expectations and the endangered person's expectations wiegh in? What other options are available? Who is worth more, me or them? Where does the risk vs gain lie?

ORANGES: Do I run to Bimini in bumpy seas for vessel fleeing back to the Bahamas. And, I would consider seas over 8' in a 37' boat to be a bit more than "bumpy".

Yes - much of that is up to the Coxn normally. BUT - a line must be drawn in the sand at some point where the COXN doesn't get to make that call. We call that line, safe operating limits. The coxn can ALWAYS turn down a mission and decide NOT to risk his life and his crews'. Once that line is hit, the decision that it is worth the risk to exceed those limits rightfully falls above the COXN.

QUOTE]

Actually, I understand the point you are making....sometimes it saves other lives to have someone of higher command know when to pull in the reigns.

I guess the point I was trying to make is that very often, it is the officer on scene who is in the best position to make the call. I think in the case of a deputy or officer, the Sgt can always race out to the scene and take over the responsibility of decision making.

I do however remember a case, boat vs ICW marker, one PIW rescued, the other we found on the bottom two hours later. We recovered this 19 yr old and could see a large gash in the back of his skull.

The Group told us to start CPR. 2 hrs under warm water, large head wound....start CPR???

I got an earful from a very frustrated nurse at the docks since now they had to continue CPR until a doctor could legally pronounce the person expired.

Again, sometimes it is the person onscene who is in the best position to make the call.

Respectfully,

Don

GAR, RBDM, etc. I do believe we're on a path of risk averseness. While we should absolutely prohibit unecessary risk, we're not bank tellers. Some of the things we do are dangerous, nature of the job.