NationStates Jolt Archive

I know, gods, I know I shouldn't be laughing about this. I know it's a serious situation involving the life of a person but... Come the f*ck on! Getting fired? If the person was in training, shouldn't he had gotten a second chance? We all make mistakes...

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (May 15) - A Nashville 911 operator has been fired after saying during a call that he didn't "give a s---" about what happened to a woman whose ex-boyfriend was threatening her.

Nashville TV station WTVF reports Sheila Jones called 911 after her ex-boyfriend held her at knifepoint. She said he eventually left her home, but kept calling and threatening her.

Emergency officials did not show up until nearly three hours after her initial call.

Jones called 911 again two-and-half-hours into the incident to say she was afraid. A recording of the call has operator Frank Roth promising police would be there soon. After Jones hangs up, he says, "I really just don't give a s--- what happens to you."

Emergency Communications Center spokeswoman Amanda Sluss said Wednesday Roth was in training at the time of the February incident and was dismissed the next month.

Comments, anyone?

Well the offence itself is stupid, but I can see why the guy got fired. That's not the kind of attitude you want your 911(999) operator to have.

I know, gods, I know I shouldn't be laughing about this. I know it's a serious situation involving the life of a person but... Come the f*ck on! Getting fired? If the person was in training, shouldn't he had gotten a second chance? We all make mistakes...



Comments, anyone?

No second chance for this one. In that sorty of job you must have a degree of empahty and sympany, this person obviously does not, so out the door they go.

Comments, anyone?That's the kind of mistake that warrants no second chance. You don't tell people that call you that they're lying or that you don't care. You send help, and have them pay for abusing the line if that was the case.

I know, gods, I know I shouldn't be laughing about this. I know it's a serious situation involving the life of a person but... Come the f*ck on! Getting fired? If the person was in training, shouldn't he had gotten a second chance? We all make mistakes...



Comments, anyone?

That was not a "mistake" it was intentional and to any rational person not something to do before you even had your first review

I say training is as good of time as any to find out if the person can not hack it.

I know, gods, I know I shouldn't be laughing about this. I know it's a serious situation involving the life of a person but... Come the f*ck on! Getting fired? If the person was in training, shouldn't he had gotten a second chance? We all make mistakes...



Comments, anyone?

"Suicide Hotline... Please hold."

It's not the fact that his attitude stunk but the fact that his comments were recorded and thus preserved.

and if that was his attitude during Training, what would it be after some time in the field.

sorry, but 911 operators are lifelines for many people. one with a callous attitude like that could've lead to the death of that person. sorry, no second chance for that.

The police show up THREE HOURS LATER when a woman who is threatened by a knife calls? That deserves an investigation if nothing else.

The next month? Why wasn't he fired on the spot?

The next month? Why wasn't he fired on the spot?

Maybe it was not caught untill someone brought it up some unknown amount of time after the situation and the tapes were reviewed ...

wasn't fired just for swearing. Was fired becase an emergency operator informed an emergency line caller that he didn't care.

Their job is to respond to emergencies. Nothing more, nothing less. He not only failed to respond to an emergency, he flat out stated his itention to not respond to that emergency.

It's like a fireman standing and watching a house burn.

I guess that after this one, 911 should check in a better way it's future employees.:p

I guess that after this one, 911 should check in a better way it's future employees.:p

I wonder why, if he was in training, was he not shadowed by an experienced operator?

I find nothing funny about that. I certainly do not want to take the chance of having an operator on the other line having an "I don't care" attitude. Was fired becase an emergency operator informed an emergency line caller that he didn't care.
No he said that after she had hung up. Although not as bad as saying it to her, it still showed his apathetic view towards his job. Nobody wants an employee who doesn't care about what they do.

Anyways, the article said he was in training at the time. Don't people normally supervise someone who is in training?

wasn't fired just for swearing. Was fired becase an emergency operator informed an emergency line caller that he didn't care.

Well, that's not really what happened at all, is it?

wasn't fired just for swearing. Was fired becase an emergency operator informed an emergency line caller that he didn't care.

Their job is to respond to emergencies. Nothing more, nothing less. He not only failed to respond to an emergency, he flat out stated his itention to not respond to that emergency.

It's like a fireman standing and watching a house burn.

except the comment was made after the caller hung up but the recorder was still going.

I don't think the 911 operator actually said they didn't care to the caller while the caller was on the line.

I wonder if the operator did contact police after the first call or a looong time after...

I know, gods, I know I shouldn't be laughing about this. I know it's a serious situation involving the life of a person but... Come the f*ck on! Getting fired? If the person was in training, shouldn't he had gotten a second chance? We all make mistakes...



Comments, anyone?

Good. We have too many of those bastards as it is. :p

So, the 911 operator helped the person in need by dispatching the police - and the caller hung up (presumably satisfied that help was on the way).

After that, the operator said their opinion on the matter which in no way affected or hindered the arrival of the police.

And they got fired.

What did they do wrong exactly?

I'm not so sure really. If he directed the Emergency Services in the correct manner and all that then I don't think he should be fired based on muttering something to himself.

So, the 911 operator helped the person in need by dispatching the police - and the caller hung up (presumably satisfied that help was on the way).

After that, the operator said their opinion on the matter which in no way affected or hindered the arrival of the police.

And they got fired.

What did they do wrong exactly?
I agree, and you said it better.

So, the 911 operator helped the person in need by dispatching the police - and the caller hung up (presumably satisfied that help was on the way).

Given that police didn't show up for three hours, I think it's safe to say that he did not dispatch the police, at least not immediately.

Given that police didn't show up for three hours, I think it's safe to say that he did not dispatch the police, at least not immediately.
I don't, if he'd deliberately delayed the response I think they would've mentioned it. explicitly.

EDIT:

And if you read it, it was three hours after her initial call (quite possibly not with him) and they arrived half an hour after she called the person in question.

Given that police didn't show up for three hours, I think it's safe to say that he did not dispatch the police, at least not immediately.

Once when I called 911 because a neighbor was beating the hell out of his wife I was told the police were "too busy" to come.

Once when I called 911 because a neighbor was beating the hell out of his wife I was told the police were "too busy" to come.

Pffft you think that's bad? Once when my Gran called the police about her stolen car they blew it up when they found it.

Given that police didn't show up for three hours, I think it's safe to say that he did not dispatch the police, at least not immediately.

Proof?

Proof?

Misread the thing. Still, not caring in a job in which you're supposed to care is not very good. I fail to see what's wrong with the firing.

Still, not caring in a job in which you're supposed to care is not very good. I fail to see what's wrong with the firing.

You'd fire someone who doesn't care about their job every minute of the day they're there?

A dispatcher is not supposed to care one way or another. A dispatcher does not work for a suicide or depression hotline. A dispatcher sends the emergency services to places they are requested to go. The dispatcher did their job in this case -nothing more, nothing less (at least from the info given in the article)

Scary shit for ya: The police (and by extension maybe the 911 operators) are under no legal obligation to render aid even though that's their job.

So, the 911 operator helped the person in need by dispatching the police - and the caller hung up (presumably satisfied that help was on the way).

After that, the operator said their opinion on the matter which in no way affected or hindered the arrival of the police.

And they got fired.

What did they do wrong exactly?

simple, the operator's opinion was recorded and filed with that call. if an investigation began for any reason (like the delay in police arriving) and that recorded message about not caring came to light, the state would be open for a lawsuit.

By firing him when the recording was discovered, the state/service can honestly say they took action against that employee.

Scary shit for ya: The police (and by extension maybe the 911 operators) are under no legal obligation to render aid even though that's their job.

They're not? I thought they were supposed to. Scary shyte indeed.

By firing him when the recording was discovered, the state/service can honestly say they took action against that employee.

What were their grounds? The dispatcher did their job by dispatching the emergency services (in this case the police) to the caller's residence. Since when does 'caring' come into it?

There is no mention of being unhelpful or discourteous to the caller, no complaint was made by the caller about the dispatchers manner, tone or helpfulness.

The dispatcher was fired for uttering a private opinion that affected the outcome of nothing.

What were their grounds? The dispatcher did their job by dispatching the emergency services (in this case the police) to the caller's residence. Since when does 'caring' come into it?

There is no mention of being unhelpful or discourteous to the caller, no complaint was made by the caller about the dispatchers manner, tone or helpfulness.

The dispatcher was fired for uttering a private opinion that affected the outcome of nothing.

He got caught and recorded saying something stupid. That's all the grounds they need. Hell, they don't NEED any grounds; they could fire him for wearing a blue shirt.

No one honestly expects employees to be 100% invested in their job 100% of the time, but there is a modicum of discretion that must be adhered to. No one would have been any wiser if he had simply waited for the recorded line to disconnect before he made his comment. But, from a management standpoint, if you catch a comment like that, you're forced into the tough situation of having to respond to it. The management is simply indemnifying themselves against him ever screwing up in the future.

Consider it like this: if anything HAD happened to the woman, and the 3 hour response time led to her injury or death, then this call would certainly be reviewed. If she tried to file suit for her injuries, citing this call as evidence that he did not make a good faith effort to get police to her, she would win in a heartbeat. It makes no difference if it ACTUALLY had any bearing on the response time. All that matters is that it could be made to APPEAR to have had a bearing. Or, say in the future this same operator takes a call and the person is injured or dies. They can, and likely would, review past calls. If this comment came up then, then it would be used as an example of how the operator did not take the duties of his job seriously. Again, the ECC would be on the hook for his dumb, recorded comment.

By getting rid of him now, the ECC is protecting themselves from ever being put in a compromising position because this one operator was dumb enough to let himself get recorded making an insensitive comment.

Hell, they don't NEED any grounds; they could fire him for wearing a blue shirt.
Which would be quickly followed by a lawsuit on the grounds of unfair dismissal. Which the dispatcher would win easily.

But, from a management standpoint, if you catch a comment like that, you're forced into the tough situation of having to respond to it. The management is simply indemnifying themselves against him ever screwing up in the future.
It's called a disciplinary procedure. It wouldn't result in a dismissal. Suspension maybe, written/official warning too - but not being fired.

Consider it like this: if anything HAD happened to the woman, and the 3 hour response time led to her injury or death, then this call would certainly be reviewed. If she tried to file suit for her injuries, citing this call as evidence that he did not make a good faith effort to get police to her, she would win in a heartbeat.
It's the police's fault - not the dispatchers. I have yet to see evidence that the dispatcher did not call the police or if he did, there is no evidence that the dispatcher told the police it wasn't a serious situation.

They can, and likely would, review past calls. If this comment came up then, then it would be used as an example of how the operator did not take the duties of his job seriously.
See above for the same answer.

By getting rid of him now, the ECC is protecting themselves from ever being put in a compromising position because this one operator was dumb enough to let himself get recorded making an insensitive comment.
Listen, if making one stupid comment was enough to get someone fired, then the entire workforce of the western world is up shit creek.

There's more to this case than meets the eye.

Which would be quickly followed by a lawsuit on the grounds of unfair dismissal. Which the dispatcher would win easily.

Tennessee is an at-will employment state, like most other states. Unless the ECC signs contracts with their employees, they can remove him for any reason as long as it does not involve any unlawful discrimination.


It's called a disciplinary procedure. It wouldn't result in a dismissal. Suspension maybe, written/official warning too - but not being fired.

For an employee still undergoing training? Perhaps. I would think they wouldn't even bother with suspension or warnings for a trainee.


It's the police's fault - not the dispatchers. I have yet to see evidence that the dispatcher did not call the police or if he did, there is no evidence that the dispatcher told the police it wasn't a serious situation.


See above for the same answer.

Again, it does not matter what actually happened. All that matters is the appearance of what happened. And regardless of the evidence the ECC might have been able to trot out showing that there was no difference in the service rendered, that one stupid, recorded comment is all that would be needed to cast doubt that the operator acted in good faith.


Listen, if making one stupid comment was enough to get someone fired, then the entire workforce of the western world is up shit creek.

There's more to this case than meets the eye.

One stupid comment uttered under your breath, or to a colleague, is not enough to get someone fired. One stupid comment made on a recorded line that implies that you did not attempt to do your job to the fullest can easily get you fired.

I have had to let people go for saying dumb things on recorded lines before. It doesn't matter if the personal opinion had any bearing on the service rendered. Again, it only matters what it looks like. And, if this ever went to court, it would definitely look like the operator did not try to do his job as well as he could have. If this had cost that woman's life, then the ECC would be in incredible amounts of trouble. The management types who employed him would be under a lot of scrutiny and would likely lose their jobs too. So, once they found this, they chose to protect themselves from this liability. To me, it seems sensible.

What were their grounds? The dispatcher did their job by dispatching the emergency services (in this case the police) to the caller's residence. Since when does 'caring' come into it?

There is no mention of being unhelpful or discourteous to the caller, no complaint was made by the caller about the dispatchers manner, tone or helpfulness.

The dispatcher was fired for uttering a private opinion that affected the outcome of nothing.

public relations. if it's in the job description to render aid in an "efficient and friendly" manner, to maintain calm while assisting, then it's more power to have him fired even tho he wasn't actually talking to the customer. However, that point is moot. Remember, the point I made was that his comment was RECORDED! thus there is a physcial record of his attitude toward the 911 caller.

the fact that he was so callous and careless during the TRAINING PHASE of his job means chances are such slips of the tongue is more likely to occur when the customer is still on the line.

Would you rather wait till some poor person get's injured or dies because of his callous attitude?

It's not like he was arrested or fined. He was TRAINING, you know. the PROBATIONARY period that all employees go through. The phase where all employess tend to be careful because they want to keep the job they just got.

Tennessee is an at-will employment state, like most other states. Unless the ECC signs contracts with their employees, they can remove him for any reason as long as it does not involve any unlawful discrimination.
Wow. That's retarded.
(Not your point - the law :D )


One stupid comment uttered under your breath, or to a colleague, is not enough to get someone fired. One stupid comment made on a recorded line that implies that you did not attempt to do your job to the fullest can easily get you fired.
Where I'm from, an implication you didn't do your job isn't enough to get you fired. Proof is needed. *shrug*

The management types who employed him would be under a lot of scrutiny and would likely lose their jobs too. So, once they found this, they chose to protect themselves from this liability. To me, it seems sensible.
To me it seems like a knee jerk reaction that is bailing out a woeful response time from the police on patrol.


Would you rather wait till some poor person get's injured or dies because of his callous attitude?
He's not a Samaritan. He still simply did his job.

It's not like he was arrested or fined.
No he was fired. A fine (in a work related sense) might have been more appropriate.

He was TRAINING, you know. the PROBATIONARY period that all employees go through. The phase where all employess tend to be careful because they want to keep the job they just got.
It still appears to me that the people who should be treated harshly are the people who showed up 3 hours late - not the person who told them to be there. *shrug*

He's not a Samaritan. He still simply did his job. nice, but it doesn't answer the question.

No he was fired. A fine (in a work related sense) might have been more appropriate. and he was a probationary employee. still undergoing training. thus the action is still appropriate.

It still appears to me that the people who should be treated harshly are the people who showed up 3 hours late - not the person who told them to be there. *shrug*sure, and when their investigators find that "I really don't F*#king care" you think they are NOT going to put the blame on the 911 caller?

Then again, we don't know if those officers are NOT being investigated for their lateness.

Wow. That's retarded.
(Not your point - the law :D )

Well, in my example, unless they fired everyone who wore a blue shirt, it WOULD be unlawful discrimination. But, the company is entirely within its rights to fire anyone who came in with a blue shirt, if it's documented. It's a bit of hyperbole.



Where I'm from, an implication you didn't do your job isn't enough to get you fired. Proof is needed. *shrug*

The recorded statement indicating he does not care about the people he is supposed to be helping is likely enough proof to terminate him.


To me it seems like a knee jerk reaction that is bailing out a woeful response time from the police on patrol.

No, it's just a public relations move to distance themselves from this guy in case anything happens, and to get rid of him to ensure nothing further can happen.

and he was a probationary employee. still undergoing training. thus the action is still appropriate.Good point. Mistakes made during the probationary period are usually punished more harshly than mistakes made once a person passes the probationary period.

Good point. Mistakes made during the probationary period are usually punished more harshly than mistakes made once a person passes the probationary period.

depends on the mistake. this one is that if only after a month he's making such comments while the Recorder is still going on, then it's not the job for him.

nice, but it doesn't answer the question.
The question is irrelevant - he did what his job was: he told the police to go to X. Being callous after the job was done has no bearing on the job.

and he was a probationary employee. still undergoing training. thus the action is still appropriate.
Maybe. Different courses for different horses I guess. Again, where I'm from probationary employees are taught to learn from their mistakes so it doesn't happen again - not simply fired the first time.

sure, and when their investigators find that "I really don't F*#king care" you think they are NOT going to put the blame on the 911 caller?
Then they'd be poor investigators. The would quickly find that "I really don't fucking care" bore no relation to the response time of the police - which surely has the greater impact on the abusive spouse?

Then again, we don't know if those officers are NOT being investigated for their lateness.
Quite. The article doesn't provide much information on any other aspects on the case.

Well, in my example, unless they fired everyone who wore a blue shirt, it WOULD be unlawful discrimination. But, the company is entirely within its rights to fire anyone who came in with a blue shirt, if it's documented. It's a bit of hyperbole.
Yeh, I got the hyperbole. But again, where I'm from there would want to a reason that X company doesn't allow blue shirts etc or they'd find themselves up before a Labour Court Tribunal. (Like I said, different courses for different horses)


The recorded statement indicating he does not care about the people he is supposed to be helping is likely enough proof to terminate him.
I'd question that point, but that's me.


No, it's just a public relations move to distance themselves from this guy in case anything happens, and to get rid of him to ensure nothing further can happen.

Which is really the root of this issue - it's all to do with PR not necessarily negligence in work or dereliction of their duty.

The question is irrelevant - he did what his job was: he told the police to go to X. Being callous after the job was done has no bearing on the job. did he? I didn't see that anywhere in the article that he dispached police after her second call. Please point it out.

Maybe. Different courses for different horses I guess. Again, where I'm from probationary employees are taught to learn from their mistakes so it doesn't happen again - not simply fired the first time. for some companies maybe, but the Probationary period is also to see if the employee will fit in with the job. The fact that he allowed his comments to be recorded shows that 1) he's getting sloppy 2) the job is affecting him rather quickly 3) his next comment could be made while the person is STILL ON THE LINE


Then they'd be poor investigators. The would quickly find that "I really don't fucking care" bore no relation to the response time of the police - which surely has the greater impact on the abusive spouse? Nice Divert atempt. too bad we're talking about the investigators looking into why the police took 3 hours to repond to a domestic violence call and not the domestic violence itself. thus the dispatcher's attitude would be taken into consideration.


Quite. The article doesn't provide much information on any other aspects on the case. hence the article only focusing on the dispatcher and nothing else.

in fact, the article doesn't state that the comment was the REASON why he was fired. only that he was fired after making that comment. so perhaps there is mor that is NOT being said/reported.

Which is really the root of this issue - it's all to do with PR not necessarily negligence in work or dereliction of their duty.
PR for WHO? the ECC? no one complained so why would they seek such PR. Unless Roth leaked it out to gain some sorta sympathy and grab his 15 mins of glory...

Then again is Nashville's ECC so piss poor that they have to show that they are working to improve themselves?

I know, gods, I know I shouldn't be laughing about this. I know it's a serious situation involving the life of a person but... Come the f*ck on! Getting fired? If the person was in training, shouldn't he had gotten a second chance? We all make mistakes...
A second chance? Are you nuts? Someone who shows themself to be either that incompetent or that lacking in compassion should NEVER be given a job in emergency services.

Which would be quickly followed by a lawsuit on the grounds of unfair dismissal. Which the dispatcher would win easily.


Listen, if making one stupid comment was enough to get someone fired, then the entire workforce of the western world is up shit creek.

There's more to this case than meets the eye.

Doubtful.

In most places, there is a three month probationary period within which you can be layed off for pretty much any reason. You also have the right to quit for any reason, without giving much notice (depends on jurisdiction).

depends on the mistake. this one is that if only after a month he's making such comments while the Recorder is still going on, then it's not the job for him.Right, it would depend on the mistake, but this one counts as a firable mistake.

Right, it would depend on the mistake, but this one counts as a firable mistake.

Was that comment was the ONLY reason he was fired? the article only says he was fired after making that comment (1 month), not fired BECAUSE of the comment. so methinks there is MORE to the story that is not being said.

Was that comment was the ONLY reason he was fired? the article only says he was fired after making that comment (1 month), not fired BECAUSE of the comment. so methinks there is MORE to the story that is not being said.There probably is something else, as you said it is odd that he'd be fired because of the comment a month after the comment was made.

I know, gods, I know I shouldn't be laughing about this. I know it's a serious situation involving the life of a person but... Come the f*ck on! Getting fired? If the person was in training, shouldn't he had gotten a second chance? We all make mistakes...



Comments, anyone?

I think s/he should've been fired.

I've had so many fucked up experiences with emergency people. I nearly died on my 17th birthday, and the ambulance took half an hour (here, they usually take a maximum of 10 minutes, even if it's not serious). Then the doctor stitched me up without waiting for the anesthetic to kick in.

Also, an ambulance officer was rude to me when I had appendicitus, saying I was "pretty happy/normal for someone in pain", and I'm like "umm, I just had a doctor come around and say that I needed to go to hospital immediately. I'm in excruciating pain, so excuse me if I'd like to deflect from the situation with humour, asshole."

A nurse once gave me a massive panic attack, when I had to go to the hospital because an optomatrist was extremely worried about my eyes (it just turns out I have allergies and astigmatism and weirdness from surgery). I listed on the form that I had sever anxiety, and he kept screaming at me, telling me I was going to go blind, then yelling at me for being anxious, and I'm not exaggerating: you could've heard him in the waiting room! So, then I had to go to another hospital to get treated for my panic attack before they looked at my eye!

Don't even get me started on the fucked up situations I've had with psychiatrists.

So, long story short, that person should be fired. That attitude is not acceptable.

There probably is something else, as you said it is odd that he'd be fired because of the comment a month after the comment was made.

Well, unless someone made a specific complaint about that particular call, then there would be no reason to go and listen to that one particular call. What most likely occurred is the supervisors took a sampling of his calls to review as part of his training process, and this call was one randomly selected to be reviewed. Bad luck on his part, but unless there was a specific reason to listen to this one call (like a complaint by the woman), then it might not have been unearthed until a review process was performed, which could have taken several weeks.

Well, unless someone made a specific complaint about that particular call, then there would be no reason to go and listen to that one particular call. What most likely occurred is the supervisors took a sampling of his calls to review as part of his training process, and this call was one randomly selected to be reviewed. Bad luck on his part, but unless there was a specific reason to listen to this one call (like a complaint by the woman), then it might not have been unearthed until a review process was performed, which could have taken several weeks.

or it might've been his whole attitude was going downhill and before they got a complaint from someone, they reviewd his performace and this recorded comment might just've been the first sign.

after all, he might've been fired. but the company may have just 'let him go' because he ended up being unsuitable for the job, which is different from fired (a small difference, but a difference nonetheless.)

that's why I say the recorded comment may not be WHY he was fired, but it was certainly a factor.

I know, gods, I know I shouldn't be laughing about this. I know it's a serious situation involving the life of a person but... Come the f*ck on! Getting fired? If the person was in training, shouldn't he had gotten a second chance? We all make mistakes...



Comments, anyone?

He smegging deserved to be fired. The job of the emergency services are to protect and/or aid people in need during an emergency. If he doesn't give a damn then why is he in the fucking business?! And his job was to make sure everyone who called who actually needed help got it ASAP. I have half a mind saying he didn't even report her call immediately and that he procrastinated. And openly saying that he didn't give a damn about her was a blatant sign that he didn't take his job seriously and that he was absolutely unfit for it. It's his smegging job to give a damn. Enough said.

wasn't fired just for swearing. Was fired becase an emergency operator informed an emergency line caller that he didn't care.

Their job is to respond to emergencies. Nothing more, nothing less. He not only failed to respond to an emergency, he flat out stated his itention to not respond to that emergency.

It's like a fireman standing and watching a house burn.

Neo Art, he didn't inform the caller he didn't care.
After Jones hangs up, he says, "I really just don't give a s--- what happens to you."

After Jones hangs up, he says, "I really just don't give a s--- what happens to you."

But still that is blatantly expressing disregard for his duty and responsibility.

simple, the operator's opinion was recorded and filed with that call. if an investigation began for any reason (like the delay in police arriving) and that recorded message about not caring came to light, the state would be open for a lawsuit.

By firing him when the recording was discovered, the state/service can honestly say they took action against that employee.

Check...

He got caught and recorded saying something stupid. That's all the grounds they need. Hell, they don't NEED any grounds; they could fire him for wearing a blue shirt.

No one honestly expects employees to be 100% invested in their job 100% of the time, but there is a modicum of discretion that must be adhered to. No one would have been any wiser if he had simply waited for the recorded line to disconnect before he made his comment. But, from a management standpoint, if you catch a comment like that, you're forced into the tough situation of having to respond to it. The management is simply indemnifying themselves against him ever screwing up in the future.

Consider it like this: if anything HAD happened to the woman, and the 3 hour response time led to her injury or death, then this call would certainly be reviewed. If she tried to file suit for her injuries, citing this call as evidence that he did not make a good faith effort to get police to her, she would win in a heartbeat. It makes no difference if it ACTUALLY had any bearing on the response time. All that matters is that it could be made to APPEAR to have had a bearing. Or, say in the future this same operator takes a call and the person is injured or dies. They can, and likely would, review past calls. If this comment came up then, then it would be used as an example of how the operator did not take the duties of his job seriously. Again, the ECC would be on the hook for his dumb, recorded comment.

By getting rid of him now, the ECC is protecting themselves from ever being put in a compromising position because this one operator was dumb enough to let himself get recorded making an insensitive comment.

...and mate.

I don't like it, either, but I'm in one of those professions where the wrong word at the wrong time can get you terminated (teaching). The reason agencies who deal directly with the public will seem to overreact and fire people for stuff like this is usually referred to as "liability". As has already been mentioned, having that comment on file exposes the police/EMS agency to a lawsuit. And if you have to ask who would sue for something like that, you've not been awake for the last 20 years.

I've had so many fucked up experiences with emergency people.
One would have to question the cause here. You are the common denominator in each situation, and many other people have wonderful things to say about emergency services. From the sounds of things, you may exhibit some drama queen behaviours.

From working in service delivery, I can tell you we bitch about that small subset of people who are annoying, all the time. IT doesn't affect our ability to do the job.
From the look of things, this guy has done his job. He's probably been informed by the relevant people that unless she's screaming that he's bashing the door down, she's priority (not that high). He knows this, he's informed her of this, he's probably pissed that there's nothing he can do, and annoyed that she keeps ringing and he keeps telling her the same thing.

I can tell you another thing. You don't want people who think they are social workers. You want people who can focus on what's the priority and what can wait. Social Workers get people killed, as they focus too much on the person in front of them, while someone else is dying. I'd prefer competent than an employee oozing compassion and empathy.

From working in service delivery, I can tell you we bitch about that small subset of people who are annoying, all the time. IT doesn't affect our ability to do the job.
Exactly - same experience from my career.

From the look of things, this guy has done his job. He's probably been informed by the relevant people that unless she's screaming that he's bashing the door down, she's priority (not that high). He knows this, he's informed her of this, he's probably pissed that there's nothing he can do, and annoyed that she keeps ringing and he keeps telling her the same thing.

I can tell you another thing. You don't want people who think they are social workers. You want people who can focus on what's the priority and what can wait. Social Workers get people killed, as they focus too much on the person in front of them, while someone else is dying. I'd prefer competent than an employee oozing compassion and empathy.

This is my point also.

One would have to question the cause here. You are the common denominator in each situation, and many other people have wonderful things to say about emergency services. From the sounds of things, you may exhibit some drama queen behaviours.

Uh, no. Next time you nearly die and the ambulance takes half an hour, you can tell yourself you're a "drama queen".

Of course I have wonderful things to say about emergency services. They've been so helpful in many situations, and they're usually very compassionate people. The reason why I was pointing out those examples is because I was pointing out that some people don't have the right attitude to do their job. Those people I made an example of did the wrong thing.

From working in service delivery, I can tell you we bitch about that small subset of people who are annoying, all the time. IT doesn't affect our ability to do the job.

Firstly, I think that's unproffesional.
Secondly, your attitude doesn't matter as much in service delivery as it does in emergency services. People who work in emergency services should be compassionate.

From the look of things, this guy has done his job. He's probably been informed by the relevant people that unless she's screaming that he's bashing the door down, she's priority (not that high). He knows this, he's informed her of this, he's probably pissed that there's nothing he can do, and annoyed that she keeps ringing and he keeps telling her the same thing.

And she should keep telling her the same thing calmly. There's no reason to snap at a woman in danger, unless you're a complete asshole, and if you're a complete asshole, you shouldn't have that particular job.

I can tell you another thing. You don't want people who think they are social workers. You want people who can focus on what's the priority and what can wait. Social Workers get people killed, as they focus too much on the person in front of them, while someone else is dying. I'd prefer competent than an employee oozing compassion and empathy.

People can be competent and compassionate.

And she should keep telling her the same thing calmly. There's no reason to snap at a woman in danger, unless you're a complete asshole, and if you're a complete asshole, you shouldn't have that particular job.
The comment was made "off-the-air"
People can be competent and compassionate.
True, but if I had to choose, I would go with the former.

I know, gods, I know I shouldn't be laughing about this. I know it's a serious situation involving the life of a person but... Come the f*ck on! Getting fired? If the person was in training, shouldn't he had gotten a second chance? We all make mistakes...



Comments, anyone?
I know that if I were employing dispatchers, I would want a candidate who cares about his fellow human beings. Since he demonstrably did not, I can see why he got fired, and why I would not hire him for much of anything else either. :(

One of the things to remember is that when you are on training, it is also called the probationary period. You can be dismissed without reason during the probationary period. This applies to all government work, including local, county and state.

Probably what happened was that his attitude kept showing up during his training period, and he was dismissed as unsuited for the job.

Now granted, he most likely had to go thru a psychological screening during th application. In my agency, we do psych screaning for 9-1-1 Telecommunicators and for police officers. Unfortunately, it is during the training period that you come to see if the person will be able to cut the job or not. At least in my state, there is no difference in background checks between 9-1-1 work and police officer.

The police show up THREE HOURS LATER when a woman who is threatened by a knife calls? That deserves an investigation if nothing else.

I'm unsurprised, especially if she was in a bad neighborhood. My boyfriend's uncle reported a break-in in the middle of the night in Oakland, and the police showed up two hours later, after he'd finally scared the burglar away.

He smegging deserved to be fired. The job of the emergency services are to protect and/or aid people in need during an emergency. If he doesn't give a damn then why is he in the fucking business?! And his job was to make sure everyone who called who actually needed help got it ASAP. I have half a mind saying he didn't even report her call immediately and that he procrastinated. And openly saying that he didn't give a damn about her was a blatant sign that he didn't take his job seriously and that he was absolutely unfit for it. It's his smegging job to give a damn. Enough said.


There's been no hint that he delayed in any way. His job is to dispatch the emergency services accurately and speedily. If he can do that, what does it actually matter whether he personally cares for people calling him.

Uh, no. Next time you nearly die and the ambulance takes half an hour, you can tell yourself you're a "drama queen".
See that "nearly" part. That's shows that the emergency services got it right. You are not the only patient of the emergency services.
The reason why I was pointing out those examples is because I was pointing out that some people don't have the right attitude to do their job. Those people I made an example of did the wrong thing.
The thing is people in stressful circumstances, often have a very poor and biased recollection of events. Without knowing both sides of the story, I wont pay much attention to the anecdotes.
What I do know is you lived. What I also know is that you said you were using humour to deal with the situation. I understand why you did that, but as I've alluded to earlier in the post, emergency services have to make tough decisions every day. if you are joking around, they probably will be thinking it can't be that bad, and will be focused on moving to the next job.

And she should keep telling her the same thing calmly. There's no reason to snap at a woman in danger, unless you're a complete asshole, and if you're a complete asshole, you shouldn't have that particular job.
Did you read the post? The phone was off the hook. There was no snapping at the woman.
We also don't know the history. For all we know, this person could have rung 5 days in the last 2 weeks, and are using the police as a bargaining chip in a stormy on-off relationship.
My partner's brother is a cop, and recently Australian law was changed so that at a domestic, the police can choose to file a complaint, even if the agrieved party doesn't want to. This was put in place, so that there would be consequences of such behaviour that is a huge waste of emergency services time.
People can be competent and compassionate.
And this person could be both, but be at the end of their rope with a time waster. They could also have a low degree of compassion, but as I said before, the dispatch has no need of compassion. There job is to get the info to the police, amabulance, or fire crew ASAP. Any words such as "that's terrible", "oh I'm so sorry", etc, is wasting precious time that they could be getting the relevant info and dispatching the right people to deal with the problem.

they should have been fired. completely unprofessional, in training for not. that employee did not have temperament for the job. hard to get fired these days it seems, especially in the customer service sector, but at least this important position still has some accountability.

See that "nearly" part. That's shows that the emergency services got it right. You are not the only patient of the emergency services.

Actually, they did not know the exact location of the cut, and if it was about half a centimetre over, it would have cut an atery and I would've died from blood loss. They did not get it right.

The thing is people in stressful circumstances, often have a very poor and biased recollection of events. Without knowing both sides of the story, I wont pay much attention to the anecdotes.

Oh, puh-lease. I'm not being biased. I'm trying to say that emergency service people should be rude or nasty, and they were in the mentioned examples. I have also had experiences with amazing emergency services people.

What I do know is you lived. What I also know is that you said you were using humour to deal with the situation. I understand why you did that, but as I've alluded to earlier in the post, emergency services have to make tough decisions every day. if you are joking around, they probably will be thinking it can't be that bad, and will be focused on moving to the next job.


They had no reason to accuse me and treat me badly. Again, I'm just trying to make the point that emergency services people shouldn't be assholes.

Did you read the post? The phone was off the hook. There was no snapping at the woman.

I assumed it meant she heard it, as though he thought she hung up. However, he still shouldn't have said that.

We also don't know the history. For all we know, this person could have rung 5 days in the last 2 weeks, and are using the police as a bargaining chip in a stormy on-off relationship.

It doesn't matter. There's no reason for a professional emergency services person to be rude to her or about her.

they should have been fired. completely unprofessional, in training for not. that employee did not have temperament for the job. hard to get fired these days it seems, especially in the customer service sector, but at least this important position still has some accountability.

Agreed.

wasn't fired just for swearing. Was fired becase an emergency operator informed an emergency line caller that he didn't care.

Their job is to respond to emergencies. Nothing more, nothing less. He not only failed to respond to an emergency, he flat out stated his itention to not respond to that emergency.

It's like a fireman standing and watching a house burn.

As a lawyer, you'd better hope that no one ever pays attention to what you say when the judge and jury are out the room, then. Perhaps it's presumptuous of me to say you definitely do this, but I've yet to meet a lawyer who doesn't make some kind of sarcastic comment about a case, defendant or witness when the important people are out the room.

The guy told what was essentially nothing but the room around him that he didn't care about the caller. Why he deserves to be fired for this is beyond me.

The guy told what was essentially nothing but the room around him that he didn't care about the caller. Why he deserves to be fired for this is beyond me.

Because he didn't just tell the room around him. He told the recorded line. Now, his feelings are in an official record. He was a trainee. He has a vested interest in not screwing up while he's still in a probationary period. Ultimately, he was careless and stupid and that's why he got fired.

"Suicide Hotline... Please hold."

It's not the fact that his attitude stunk but the fact that his comments were recorded and thus preserved.

and if that was his attitude during Training, what would it be after some time in the field.

sorry, but 911 operators are lifelines for many people. one with a callous attitude like that could've lead to the death of that person. sorry, no second chance for that.

The police show up THREE HOURS LATER when a woman who is threatened by a knife calls? That deserves an investigation if nothing else.Have you read the story at all?

I assumed it meant she heard it, as though he thought she hung up. However, he still shouldn't have said that.



You fail at reading comprehension. Go back and read the article.

Actually, they did not know the exact location of the cut, and if it was about half a centimetre over, it would have cut an atery and I would've died from blood loss. They did not get it right.

So you're actually dead right now? They got there in time to save your life, thusly they got it right. Would it have been better (for you) if they had gotten there earlier? Yes.

The comment was made "off-the-air"technically no, since the recorder was still on.

There are some people here who seem to expect Angels in the emergency dispatch. Emergency calls aren't all just racing out and saving a poor injured persons life.

There are idiots who keep coming back due to taking drugs. There are idiots who have killed the other person in the car crash they caused due to drink driving but they may live. You may have to defer an ambulance to an important, but less medically critical case, to help save the lives of these "less deserving" people. You will often be abused.

The job is not a bed of roses where you get a fuzzy glow of joy of saving lives every second of the day. The guy vented. Get over it. It does not affect his ability to do the job. In fact, I'd be worried about a person's mental state if they never occaisionally said something a little callous.

There are some people here who seem to expect Angels in the emergency dispatch. Emergency calls aren't all just racing out and saving a poor injured persons life. and calling 911 is for emergencies. making false or frivolous 911 calls are illegal in most areas.

There are idiots who keep coming back due to taking drugs. There are idiots who have killed the other person in the car crash they caused due to drink driving but they may live. You may have to defer an ambulance to an important, but less medically critical case, to help save the lives of these "less deserving" people. You will often be abused. I work in Tech Support. we HAVE to be courtious to idots who cannot find their power switch on their PC's. we have to be understanding to people who don't know a CPU from their Printer. We have to be patient with people who forget their passwords in less than a minute after getting their passwords.

to be less would be a firing offense.

911 deals with people's emergencies. so yes, User X's 5th od this month has to be treated with the same care as a mother in a car wreak.

The job is not a bed of roses where you get a fuzzy glow of joy of saving lives every second of the day. The guy vented. Get over it. It does not affect his ability to do the job. In fact, I'd be worried about a person's mental state if they never occaisionally said something a little callous.and I would be worried about a man who said something callous in a recorder. venting is one thing, but being RECORDED when you vent ABOUT THE CALLER AND HOW YOU DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THEM is quite different.

also, please show that he was fired BECAUSE of what he said and not fired AFTER he said what he said.

and calling 911 is for emergencies. making false or frivolous 911 calls are illegal in most areas.
And yet people still call them for frivolous things. Go figure.

I work in Tech Support. we HAVE to be courtious to idots who cannot find their power switch on their PC's. we have to be understanding to people who don't know a CPU from their Printer. We have to be patient with people who forget their passwords in less than a minute after getting their passwords.
I work in Local Government - all day every day I have to deal with the public. After a particularly tough/irritating phone call/public visitor I would frequently utter something after I've put the phone down or left the room. It doesn't affect my ability to help them or solve their problem because I'm efficient and a fast worker.


venting is one thing, but being RECORDED when you vent ABOUT THE CALLER AND HOW YOU DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THEM is quite different. Since the dispatcher isn't physically able to help the person in distress, I fail to see the difference.

also, please show that he was fired BECAUSE of what he said and not fired AFTER he said what he said.

We don't know why he was fired. The article is misleading, and in fact the wording of the OP adds to this. It appears from both that the person was fired solely because of this one instance. I doubt that is the case.

And yet people still call them for frivolous things. Go figure.yep, and some even get arrested. howabout that?

I work in Local Government - all day every day I have to deal with the public. After a particularly tough/irritating phone call/public visitor I would frequently utter something after I've put the phone down or left the room. BINGO! but are you recorded when you utter that something?
It doesn't affect my ability to help them or solve their problem because I'm efficient and a fast worker. except the problem is not what he said, but the fact that it was recorded and stored in the file.

Since the dispatcher isn't physically able to help the person in distress, I fail to see the difference. you don't? here, let me explain the difference.
one is venting to let out frustration among others who are in the same situation. i.e. venting to co-workers.
the other is venting about a customer and recording it. then putting that recording in a file that can be reviewed by anyone. INCLUDING THE CUSTOMER IF THEY ASKED.

it was recorded, filed and stored. had anything happened that would cause that file to be reviewed. say down the line a customer complains about Roth's attitude on the phone. then that comment would come back and not just haunt Roth, but everyone else in the ECC workplace.

then you add to that the fact that the call can be used for training or even PSA's. How would you like to hear one of your vents being aired while showing that your branch/division cares?

he recorded himself making that comment. he was sloppy and it may have been a factor to his firing.

We don't know why he was fired. The article is misleading, and in fact the wording of the OP adds to this. It appears from both that the person was fired solely because of this one instance. I doubt that is the case. exactly. the article states he was fired AFTER making that comment, not fired FOR making that comment.

it's still bad for him to have such comments recorded, but we don't know why he was fired. perhaps he slipped up and actually told a customer he didn't care about their situation. perhaps his attitude on the phone degraded and this recorded comment was just the first step of that downward spiral. It's not said, and eveyone (including me at the beginning) assumed the recording was the reason.

Especially bad for him since it was recorded while he was training and he didn't have a work history there to prove that it was a fluke.

technically no, since the recorder was still on.

My point was that it was not said to the caller.

My point was that it was not said to the caller.

and the point some have been making is it didn't matter if it wasn't said to the caller because it was recorded and stored away where it can then be retreived and heard.

Why do people seem to want some degree of compassion in the operators of an emergency dispatch service? I would think no nonsense, fact, and efficiency would be the important traits.

But the reality is that people do want to at least feel some sense of compassion from others (even if it is compassion of lies), in particular those services which are seen as a public service. PR is important, and employees which could damage the company image are detrimental to that company.

I don't think the employee should be fired for what he said (unless what he said violates his terms of employment), but I do believe he should be fired if the employer wants to fire him.

Why do people seem to want some degree of compassion in the operators of an emergency dispatch service? I would think no nonsense, fact, and efficiency would be the important traits.

I couldn't care less about his compassion. It's not important, in my opinion, to perform his job. What I would want from him, in addition to the traits you mentioned, would be common sense and discretion. He failed to show either of those traits.

He put them in a potentially compromising position. If he hadn't been fired and this came out, people would be clamoring to know if he dealt with anyone else in this manner and if anyone was harmed. They decided to remove the potential liability before it could harm them.

The company does not owe him his job. They can likely easily replace him at a minimal loss. The moral of the story is, if you say or do something dumb and make your bosses look stupid for employing you, except to get canned.

BINGO! but are you recorded when you utter that something?
except the problem is not what he said, but the fact that it was recorded and stored in the file.
I'm on security camera most of the day.

you don't? here, let me explain the difference.
one is venting to let out frustration among others who are in the same situation. i.e. venting to co-workers.
the other is venting about a customer and recording it. then putting that recording in a file that can be reviewed by anyone. INCLUDING THE CUSTOMER IF THEY ASKED.
Again, so what. Show me how that affected the police response time? There's no evidence of any link that one affected the other.

How would you like to hear one of your vents being aired while showing that your branch/division cares?
I wouldn't give a shit because it doesn't affect my work rate if I particularly care about the customer or not. I work - not to please people, but to work.

he recorded himself making that comment. he was sloppy and it may have been a factor to his firing.

exactly. the article states he was fired AFTER making that comment, not fired FOR making that comment.

it's still bad for him to have such comments recorded, but we don't know why he was fired. perhaps he slipped up and actually told a customer he didn't care about their situation. perhaps his attitude on the phone degraded and this recorded comment was just the first step of that downward spiral. It's not said, and eveyone (including me at the beginning) assumed the recording was the reason.

Especially bad for him since it was recorded while he was training and he didn't have a work history there to prove that it was a fluke.

True, like I said before (and you and one or two others), the article doesn't give enough info.

/done with the topic.

and the point some have been making is it didn't matter if it wasn't said to the caller because it was recorded and stored away where it can then be retreived and heard.

I was correcting Amor (I think) who thought that it had been said to the caller.

I'm on security camera most of the day. so? your point? are you pissing in the coffee pot? shagging someone on camera?

does your security camera even tape audio to record your rants?

and what are the chances that your rants would be released to the media?
better or worse than a 911 call?

Again, so what. Show me how that affected the police response time? There's no evidence of any link that one affected the other. who's arguing response time?

I wouldn't give a shit because it doesn't affect my work rate if I particularly care about the customer or not. I work - not to please people, but to work. isn't your work public relations?
I work in Local Government - all day every day I have to deal with the public. After a particularly tough/irritating phone call/public visitor I would frequently utter something after I've put the phone down or left the room.

yep. so why rant about the customer after the customer leaves, or you leave the room? why not rant about the pissy customer while they're there?

guess you do care about the customer after all.


True, like I said before (and you and one or two others), the article doesn't give enough info. which is why I wonder why people say he shouldn't be fired because of the comment when the article doesn't say the comment was the only reason he was fired.

/done with the topic.ok, bye bye. :(

so? your point? are you pissing in the coffee pot? shagging someone on camera?
My point was simply answering your question
BINGO! but are you recorded when you utter that something? in that I am recorded all day.

does your security camera even tape audio to record your rants?One does, one doesn't. I don't "rant". Neither did the dispatcher - he made a comment. There is an important difference there. If the guy (or even myself) were ranting constantly about customers/clients then yes, that could result in disciplinary action being taken. An isolated off the cuff comment? No.

and what are the chances that your rants would be released to the media?
better or worse than a 911 call?
Oh I used to deal with the media, and I had to be very careful in what I said to them on the record. However, off the record it was more understanding. But I digress.

who's arguing response time?
Seems that people here (not necessarily yourself) were decrying the dispatchers actions because it took three hours for the police to show up. The argument appears (validly) to have progressed to "probationary period/disciplinary practices"

isn't your work public relations?
Not anymore - was in Local Government then too and it was just a transfer/promotion to a different department.


yep. so why rant about the customer after the customer leaves, or you leave the room? why not rant about the pissy customer while they're there?
Because I'd rather not get assaulted at my workplace! And when a customer shows me a complete and utter lack of respect - I don't slap on a shit eating grin and nod my head! I give it back to them. My superiors have zero problem with this. (Again, I digress)

guess you do care about the customer after all.
No, I care about my own safety!


which is why I wonder why people say he shouldn't be fired because of the comment when the article doesn't say the comment was the only reason he was fired.
I just think the article/OP was a little misleading. Then the first few posts started a cavalcade and etc etc. Here we are. :)

ok, bye bye. :(
Stop sucking me back in :D

My point was simply answering your question in that I am recorded all day. Damn, I was hoping for some juicy vids. :p

One does, one doesn't. I don't "rant". Neither did the dispatcher - he made a comment. There is an important difference there. If the guy (or even myself) were ranting constantly about customers/clients then yes, that could result in disciplinary action being taken. An isolated off the cuff comment? No. and that is what's not known. is the recorded comment an isolated off the cuff comment or part of a series that was unfortunatly recorded. People are assuming that it was because of that comment that he was fired when the article only states that he was fired after that comment (one month after.)

Oh I used to deal with the media, and I had to be very careful in what I said to them on the record. However, off the record it was more understanding. But I digress. True, but I'll bet you'ld be in a shitstorm with your boss if you were not careful with what you said to them.

Seems that people here (not necessarily yourself) were decrying the dispatchers actions because it took three hours for the police to show up. The argument appears (validly) to have progressed to "probationary period/disciplinary practices" I would admit it was unusal for me. which is why I mentioned a possible investigation.

and if such an investigation took place, they would examine each call the lady made to 911 and then that comment would be revealed (and do you think something juicy like that would NOT be leaked to the media?)

and if the supervisor did review it and IF he did fire Roth with the comment as a factor (not the sole source) Roth was a probationary employee. thus he might've been let go because he wasn't suitable for the job. technically, 'firing' and 'letting go' is the same thing, just that one sounds harsher.

Not anymore - was in Local Government then too and it was just a transfer/promotion to a different department. Congrats!

I just think the article/OP was a little misleading. Then the first few posts started a cavalcade and etc etc. Here we are. :) yep.

Stop sucking me back in :D oops... I did it again... :eek:

except the comment was made after the caller hung up but the recorder was still going.

I don't think the 911 operator actually said they didn't care to the caller while the caller was on the line.

I wonder if the operator did contact police after the first call or a looong time after...

Hurting the feelings of the caller isn't the point. Yes, it would be a terrible thing to say to a person, especially in such a situation, but punishment for hurting someone isn't the only reason to loose a job.

The guy clearly didn't want to do his job. He demonstrated that he was an unreliable person to have in a job where lives are on the line.

If he worked in costumer service in the private sector how long do you think he'd last if he was taped saying "I don't give a shit if buy anything from this company, it's not going into my pocket?" Even if he didn't say it to the customer, meaning he shouldn't be fired for rudeness, he has still demonstrated that he is not likely to move merchandise. He'd be fired because he's costing the company money that could be used up by someone who will make more money.

This guy got fired because he was in the way of a person who would actually save lives.

You fail at reading comprehension. Go back and read the article.

Clearly I realised I was mistaken, asshole.

So you're actually dead right now? They got there in time to save your life, thusly they got it right. Would it have been better (for you) if they had gotten there earlier? Yes.

You don't understand - they didn't know it wasn't in that place. Therefore, if it was in that place, and I died, it would be their fault for taking so bloody long. Anyway, this coversation is getting way off topic.

I was correcting Amor (I think) who thought that it had been said to the caller.

Which is fair enough, but I still think it was wrong that he said it at all.

Clearly I realised I was mistaken, asshole.

Maybe next time you won't have a case of verbal diarrhea.

You don't understand - they didn't know it wasn't in that place. Therefore, if it was in that place, and I died, it would be their fault for taking so bloody long. Anyway, this coversation is getting way off topic.
True. About the off topic, not about the ambulance.
I will re-iterate my drama queen line. If it was a severed artery, there are some Very Obvious and Extreme Signs. The blood flowing like a Saudi oil gusher is one. If the person who called the ambulance spoke of these signs, an ambulance would have got there quicker. Or should someone else who got the ambulance you wanted, died? Have you heard of triage?

The guy clearly didn't want to do his job. He demonstrated that he was an unreliable person to have in a job where lives are on the line.
His comment does not show this at all. It shows he was frustrated. That's it. A different perspective, is that he must want to do the job well, to be frustrated enough to make the comment. If he didn't care about his job, he wouldn't have said anything. Saying a negative comment requires a degree of caring about what you are commenting on as well.

If he worked in costumer service in the private sector how long do you think he'd last if he was taped saying "I don't give a shit if buy anything from this company, it's not going into my pocket?" Even if he didn't say it to the customer, meaning he shouldn't be fired for rudeness, he has still demonstrated that he is not likely to move merchandise.
I suggest you read a book called "Pretending you Care: The Retail Employees Handbook" by Norm Feuti. That's what nearly every retail clerk thinks. Why do you think companies pay bonuses to salespeople? They know they have to motivate employees by the only way possible. Cash.
This guy got fired because he was in the way of a person who would actually save lives.
I don't see how you come to that conclusion from the article or OP.

After Jones hangs up, he says, "I really just don't give a s--- what happens to you."

I'm not taking sides but...he didn't curse at her, herself...

So, the 911 operator helped the person in need by dispatching the police - and the caller hung up (presumably satisfied that help was on the way).

After that, the operator said their opinion on the matter which in no way affected or hindered the arrival of the police.

And they got fired.

What did they do wrong exactly?

Having an opinion at all.

A normal employee has the right to think his work sucks. A doctor does not have the right to hate his patients, and an emergency operator does not have the right to be apathetic about emergencies. If they want to be able to hate their callers, they should go into tech support.

Having an opinion at all.

A normal employee has the right to think his work sucks. A doctor does not have the right to hate his patients, and an emergency operator does not have the right to be apathetic about emergencies. If they want to be able to hate their callers, they should go into tech support.
WTF. Using Doctors as a counter example. Doctor's "bedside manner" has been a cause for complaint for years.
He can be apathetitic about the emergency. If he passes the info on to the right people, his opinion on the work, callers, etc is irrelevent.

If every person who hated their job had to be fired, no-one would get a burger or a coffee again.

The guy clearly didn't want to do his job. He demonstrated that he was an unreliable person to have in a job where lives are on the line.

No, he did not demonstrate that at all.


If he worked in costumer service in the private sector how long do you think he'd last if he was taped saying "I don't give a shit if buy anything from this company, it's not going into my pocket?" Even if he didn't say it to the customer, meaning he shouldn't be fired for rudeness, he has still demonstrated that he is not likely to move merchandise. He'd be fired because he's costing the company money that could be used up by someone who will make more money.
.

If he worked in the private sector they'd probably review his sales figures and judge him on results alone.

Which is fair enough, but I still think it was wrong that he said it at all.
He should have made sure it wasn't recorded. :D
You don't understand - they didn't know it wasn't in that place. Therefore, if it was in that place, and I died, it would be their fault for taking so bloody long.
But you didn't die, so they did get there in time. What matters is what actually happened, not what might have happened.

He should have made sure it wasn't recorded. :D

Well, no. He shouldn't have said it. It shows he isn't morally equipped for the job.

But you didn't die, so they did get there in time. What matters is what actually happened, not what might have happened.

Of course "what might happen" matters. Why the hell do you think hospitals react so quickly when people have chest pains? It could be anxiety. It could be a chest infection. Your heart could be racing becuase you have a blood hangover. But no, it could be a heart attack. That's why they see to you immediately.

True. About the off topic, not about the ambulance.
I will re-iterate my drama queen line. If it was a severed artery, there are some Very Obvious and Extreme Signs. The blood flowing like a Saudi oil gusher is one. If the person who called the ambulance spoke of these signs, an ambulance would have got there quicker.

Blood was flowing like "a Saudi oil gusher". Several people called the ambulance. It shouldn't have taken half an hour. They did the wrong thing. There is no reason for an ambulance to ever take half an hour in a city where it normally takes a maximum of 10 minutes, even for something minor.

Or should someone else who got the ambulance you wanted, died? Have you heard of triage?

No, I've never head of triage. :rolleyes:

Blood was flowing like "a Saudi oil gusher". Several people called the ambulance. It shouldn't have taken half an hour. They did the wrong thing. There is no reason for an ambulance to ever take half an hour in a city where it normally takes a maximum of 10 minutes, even for something minor.
Pardon. 10 minutes? I have a friend for you to meet. I call him Mr Reality.

No, I've never head of triage. :rolleyes:
Your sarcasm shows me that you may have heard of it, and you think it applies to everyone else but you.
I apologise foe the harsh tone but your are being completely unreasonable and selfish and need to realise that emergency services don't just deal with you. You lived. They got there in time. The end.

Pardon. 10 minutes? I have a friend for you to meet. I call him Mr Reality.

Hi Mr Reality, I can't work out why you're friends with Fishutopia. Does he put out?

Ambulances tend only to take 10 minutes where I live.

Your sarcasm shows me that you may have heard of it, and you think it applies to everyone else but you.

No, my sacrasm indicates that I think you're ridiculous for asking whether I've heard of TRIAGE.

I apologise foe the harsh tone but your are being completely unreasonable and selfish and need to realise that emergency services don't just deal with you. You lived. They got there in time. The end.

I don't particularly want your apology. Didn't mummy teach you it was rude to say "sorry, but..."?

Ambulances tend only to take 10 minutes where I live.
I understand your overwhelming sense of entitlement now. "Where I live". The rich white girl didn't get good service.
Refute the point about the fact you lived meant the service was adequate. When you can somehow control the ambulance calls to be a regular pattern of 1 an hour, instead of 10 in 1 hour and then maybe 3 hours with nothing, then complain about the service.
Do you have any idea what was happening to other people at the time? Where the ambulances were before they got to you?Maybe it was someone who was in a bad part of town who should be forced to wait an hour when they have a severed artery, so the people in your part of town can be looked after?
I don't particularly want your apology. Didn't mummy teach you it was rude to say "sorry, but..."?
Apology retracted. You deserve the tone. Your arrogance, your overwhelming sense of entitlement, and lying to try to make a point. That's weak. If you were bleeding like a Saudi oil gushing for 30 minutes, you'd be well and truly dead.

I am going to assume you are a teenager with limited life experience, or otherwise you'd have more tolerance to the limitations of your fellow man. I have a guess that you grew up in a culture where you were rich enough that people served you, and you probably had very few relatives or friends who were in the class of people who serve. I hope when you grow older, your arrogance is tempered with compassion and consideration, and you accept that most people try their best in trying circumstances.

Yes, I understand you will think that last part is ironic.

Ambulances tend only to take 10 minutes where I live.

I'd love to see the statistical data you have to back up this assertion. Or are you just pulling it out of thin air?

Ambulances tend only to take 10 minutes where I live.



They saved your life. Isn't that what's important in the end?
Quit fucking complaining. What else do you want from them? A brownie?

They saved your life. Isn't that what's important in the end?
Quit fucking complaining. What else do you want from them? A brownie?

well... this one lady who drives an ambulance here does make some pretty good brownies... :p

well... this one lady who drives an ambulance here does make some pretty good brownies... :p

Mmmm.... brownies....
http://www.dianasdesserts.com/assets/managed/categories/Peanut_Swirl_Brownies.jpg

Well, no. He shouldn't have said it. It shows he isn't morally equipped for the job.
His job is/was to answer the phone and dispatch emergency services where needed, how does his comment show that "he isn't morally equipped for the job"?
Of course "what might happen" matters. Why the hell do you think hospitals react so quickly when people have chest pains? It could be anxiety. It could be a chest infection. Your heart could be racing becuase you have a blood hangover. But no, it could be a heart attack. That's why they see to you immediately.
Yees, in the present tense what might happen matters, however in the the past tense it does not. You might have died, you didn't, therefore they did their job.

They saved your life. Isn't that what's important in the end?

Apparently not.

His job is/was to answer the phone and dispatch emergency services where needed, how does his comment show that "he isn't morally equipped for the job"?



I personally don't like the idea of an asshole working in a job that is about saving lives. I don't think someone who "doesn't care" should be doing that kind of job.

They saved your life. Isn't that what's important in the end?
Quit fucking complaining. What else do you want from them? A brownie?

Yes, of course, that's what's important. God, this whole discussion was supposed to be about a 911 operator anyway.

I'd love to see the statistical data you have to back up this assertion. Or are you just pulling it out of thin air?

Uh, In my experience in my city ambulances tend to take about 10 minutes. Even if I've called an ambulance for a homeless person who is feeling a little groggy or has had a minor injury, they have only taken 10 minutes. When I called for a car accident (in which I said no one was injured), the emergency services took about 5 minutes. When I called when someone fell of their bike, it took about 5 minutes.

I understand your overwhelming sense of entitlement now. "Where I live". The rich white girl didn't get good service.

Where do you get that impression from? You think I'm saying things that I'm not saying. Perhaps you need to see someone about that.

By saying "where I live" I meant in my country and my city not my "cosmipolitan suburb". I figured that in other cities and other countries, perhaps the times were different. You can go fuck yourself if you're going to bring in race or economic status.

Refute the point about the fact you lived meant the service was adequate. When you can somehow control the ambulance calls to be a regular pattern of 1 an hour, instead of 10 in 1 hour and then maybe 3 hours with nothing, then complain about the service.
Do you have any idea what was happening to other people at the time? Where the ambulances were before they got to you?Maybe it was someone who was in a bad part of town who should be forced to wait an hour when they have a severed artery, so the people in your part of town can be looked after?

Actually, at the time, I was in a "bad part of town", so you can put this theory back in your ass.

Apology retracted. You deserve the tone. Your arrogance, your overwhelming sense of entitlement, and lying to try to make a point. That's weak. If you were bleeding like a Saudi oil gushing for 30 minutes, you'd be well and truly dead.

I'm not lying. Perhaps you and I have different opinions of what "gushing like oil" means, but I lost about 2 litres of blood (EDIT: when I asked the ambulance people - who were quite nice by the way, and I never said they weren't - said I'd lost "probably just under 2 litres?"). I soaked 5 or more towels to the point that they were wringing wet, and covered an entire balcony (about 4x2 metres) with blood. I don't have an "overwhelming sense of entitlement". I believe everyone deserves the same amount of service: and I believe everyone deserves good service, and that everyone deserves for emergency services people to give a damn about them, unlike that 911 operator.

I am going to assume you are a teenager with limited life experience, or otherwise you'd have more tolerance to the limitations of your fellow man. I have a guess that you grew up in a culture where you were rich enough that people served you, and you probably had very few relatives or friends who were in the class of people who serve. I hope when you grow older, your arrogance is tempered with compassion and consideration, and you accept that most people try their best in trying circumstances.

Excuse me? You don't know anything about my life experience. You don't know anything about my financial situation and you know nothing about the class of people I've associated with.

I am compassionate. Jesus, I call ambulances for homeless people when other people just walk past, I always stop and help everyone, I always comfort people or help them if they're hurt. So stop assuming you know me. You're proving that you are, in fact, the arrogant one. I wouldn't dare to assume that I know about your life, so perhaps you should give me the respect not to assume that you know about mine.

I just expect that emergency services people should be compassionate too. They shouldn't say things like "I don't care".

Mmmm.... brownies....
http://www.dianasdesserts.com/assets/managed/categories/Peanut_Swirl_Brownies.jpg

Damn, if only they were gluten free. ;)

Damn, if only they were gluten free. ;)

*makes you gluten free brownies*

*makes you gluten free brownies*

Sweet. :)

I personally don't like the idea of an asshole working in a job that is about saving lives. I don't think someone who "doesn't care" should be doing that kind of job.
I think a one off comment, taken out of context, doesn't show he doesn't care. In a moment of frustration, he vented, and it wasn't to the woman. If he said to the women "Get off my emergency line, I need to deal with people with real emergencies", then you'd have a point.

God, this whole discussion was supposed to be about a 911 operator anyway.{trimmed some stuff}Excuse me? You don't know anything about my life experience. You don't know anything about my financial situation and you know nothing about the class of people I've associated with.

True. I'll try to explain where I'm coming from, and then let the examination of your anecdote end. The problem is, while what you write may all be true, the volume of coincidental things that support your argument are beginning to overwhelm me, so there's not much you can do to convince me.

I'm 33, and never had the misfortune of having to call an ambulance ( I admit, an anecdotal "truth" you can choose to ignore). You seem to have a lot of experience with them. Convenient. You were in a bad part of town. Convenient. You've called ambulances for homeless people. How nice of you? Did you have your homeless person detector on that day? I hope you can see how someone on the other end of a computer screen may have problems accepting these "truths".

Also, I have seen the before and after of people, when they have never served the public, and when they have served the public for some time. There is a lot more tolerance to the service industry once you have been in a job that serves the public.
Your lack of understanding of why an ambulance took 30 minutes to get to someone bleeding at the rate of just over 1 millilitre a second, is why I made an assumption of arrogance and priviliged upbringing. Obviously I could be wrong, but as I can't know you, to respond, I will make assumptions on the evidence I have.
You also pushed one of my big triggers. I really get annoyed at what I see as people demanding perfect service,when adequate service will do, and the people providing the service are doing their best in a tough job.

Clearly I realised I was mistaken, asshole.

Flames the person who then goes on to post:

Hi Mr Reality, I can't work out why you're friends with Fishutopia. Does he put out?

and...

No, my sacrasm indicates that I think you're ridiculous for asking whether I've heard of TRIAGE.

and...

I don't particularly want your apology. Didn't mummy teach you it was rude to say "sorry, but..."?

and also...

You can go fuck yourself if you're going to bring in race or economic status.

Seems to me that the rectal bell is tolling for thee, not he.

I personally don't like the idea of an asshole working in a job that is about saving lives. I don't think someone who "doesn't care" should be doing that kind of job.

If he's indeed saving lives, he cares in the only way that really matters.

Yes, of course, that's what's important. God, this whole discussion was supposed to be about a 911 operator anyway.

Yes, and it was. Then you started to bring up a whole load of crap about ambulance service where you are and amazing coincidental anecdotes about ambulance service all over your fine city. If the discussion has wavered, the cause is in the mirror nearest you.

By saying "where I live" I meant in my country and my city not my "cosmipolitan suburb". I figured that in other cities and other countries, perhaps the times were different. You can go fuck yourself if you're going to bring in race or economic status.

That might have been a bit presumptuous of Fishutopia, but at least it wasn't a flame.

Actually, at the time, I was in a "bad part of town", so you can put this theory back in your ass.

Okay, to which of several ambulance summons in your posts does this quip refer? If it was the one with 2L of blood loss, then that might explain the delay.

I believe everyone deserves the same amount of service: and I believe everyone deserves good service, and that everyone deserves for emergency services people to give a damn about them, unlike that 911 operator.

An assertion you keep making but have no proof to support.

I am compassionate. Jesus, I call ambulances for homeless people when other people just walk past, I always stop and help everyone, I always comfort people or help them if they're hurt. So stop assuming you know me. You're proving that you are, in fact, the arrogant one. I wouldn't dare to assume that I know about your life, so perhaps you should give me the respect not to assume that you know about mine.

Fair enough. It becomes all the more difficult to do so, however, when you are immediately defensive to the point of histrionics when you're called on the stuff you post. People are asked to put up or shut up all the time here -- you get and deserve no special consideration. How can you not know that outlandish Mother-Theresa-like claims are going to be pounced on in this forum? It is the height of a naivete that you cannot possibly possess to get defensive when someone refuses to swallow everything you type.

I just expect that emergency services people should be compassionate too. They shouldn't say things like "I don't care".

That's fine. I expect them to care enough to do their job well and do it as efficiently as possible. What they say about me after they're done transferring my call or carting me off to the emergency room means less than nothing to me if I'm the victim.

Your skin might be too sensitive for this room if you're going to go chronically ballistic when someone doesn't immediately believe what you say. Which is a shame -- apart from overreactions, you're usually a credit to the forum.

That might have been a bit presumptuous of Fishutopia, but at least it wasn't a flame.

Personally I feel calling someone an asshole less rude and less stupid than assuming "where I live" referred to my cosmipolitan suburb and that I'm a "rich white girl".



Okay, to which of several ambulance summons in your posts does this quip refer? If it was the one with 2L of blood loss, then that might explain the delay.

It does refer to that, and if it was because I was in a poorer area, not simply because the system didn't do particularly well, I'm going to be infuriated.



An assertion you keep making but have no proof to support.

I need to prove everyone deserves good service?



Fair enough. It becomes all the more difficult to do so, however, when you are immediately defensive to the point of histrionics when you're called on the stuff you post. People are asked to put up or shut up all the time here -- you get and deserve no special consideration. How can you not know that outlandish Mother-Theresa-like claims are going to be pounced on in this forum? It is the height of a naivete that you cannot possibly possess to get defensive when someone refuses to swallow everything you type.

I still have the right to reply.

That's fine. I expect them to care enough to do their job well and do it as efficiently as possible. What they say about me after they're done transferring my call or carting me off to the emergency room means less than nothing to me if I'm the victim.

Then we simply have different opinions.

I think a one off comment, taken out of context, doesn't show he doesn't care. In a moment of frustration, he vented, and it wasn't to the woman. If he said to the women "Get off my emergency line, I need to deal with people with real emergencies", then you'd have a point.

I think he shouldn't have vented in that manner even if he was frustrated. It's his job to remain calm.



True. I'll try to explain where I'm coming from, and then let the examination of your anecdote end. The problem is, while what you write may all be true, the volume of coincidental things that support your argument are beginning to overwhelm me, so there's not much you can do to convince me.

I'm 33, and never had the misfortune of having to call an ambulance ( I admit, an anecdotal "truth" you can choose to ignore). You seem to have a lot of experience with them. Convenient. You were in a bad part of town. Convenient. You've called ambulances for homeless people. How nice of you? Did you have your homeless person detector on that day? I hope you can see how someone on the other end of a computer screen may have problems accepting these "truths".

I haven't had a lot of experience with them, but I have been in one twice (the two times of mentioned), I've called ambulances for people (4 times: car crash, 2x homeless people, bike accident). I was at a friend's place: my birthday party was there. It's not exactly the safest or nicest suburb. And no, I didn't have a "homeless person detector" - one time, a man right in the middle of the city was (according to him) robbed, and he was crying and lying on the ground and he was delerious and in pain. My fiance and I called the ambulance - everyone else just walked past, except for a nice middle-aged couple. The second time, I was in the car with my mother and we drove past a man lying in a driveway. We stopped, and he said he was feeling very bad, and he looked like he'd overdosed, and we called an ambulance. Oh, and I've been in an ambulance with my father who has chest problems. I can't see why you'd have a hard time accepting these "truths", unless you've never experienced good people in your life.

Also, I have seen the before and after of people, when they have never served the public, and when they have served the public for some time. There is a lot more tolerance to the service industry once you have been in a job that serves the public.
Your lack of understanding of why an ambulance took 30 minutes to get to someone bleeding at the rate of just over 1 millilitre a second, is why I made an assumption of arrogance and priviliged upbringing. Obviously I could be wrong, but as I can't know you, to respond, I will make assumptions on the evidence I have.

I know why the ambulance took so long. They diverted both of my ambulances to car crashes. It still shouldn't have happened in a city where ambulances generally take 10 minutes. Perhaps a lack of staff or a lack of rescources is the problem, but I am still entitled to be upset. You, however, are not entitled to assume that I've had a privliged upbringing based upon that. You are wrong, and you're reading the "evidence" incorrectly.

You also pushed one of my big triggers. I really get annoyed at what I see as people demanding perfect service,when adequate service will do, and the people providing the service are doing their best in a tough job.

Oh God, another "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" idiot.

I think he shouldn't have vented in that manner even if he was frustrated. It's his job to remain calm.
We will have to agree to disagree here. His job is to get information about what someones emergency is, and then give that info to people who will deal with the emergency. Remaining calm is critical to his job, which is what he did . He got off the phone, he vented. No problem in my book.

I know why the ambulance took so long. They diverted both of my ambulances to car crashes. How do you know that? And this just reinforces my point. You knew of the reasons why, the reasons are good, and yet you still think the service is inadequate.

Oh God, another "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" idiot.
To paraphrase yourself , You, however, are not entitled to assume that I'm a "if it aint broke don't fix it" idiot. I have never said the ambulance service couldn't be better. My continual use of the word "adequate" I would think shows that.
One of my very strong traits in this forum is rampant socialism. Rampant socialists believe in a very efficient, fully paid for health system. That means I think the ambulance can be better, but both examples posited (the original caller saying what he said, and your just over 1ml/second bleed) were examples of the ambulance service doing well enough.
I wouldn't raise this last part, but you keep with the insults, so I think you have made yourself fair game. Is the reason you got so annoyed, was that my assumptions were accurate in part. In another thread your good knowledge of GPA shows someone who is still in, or just out of the American education system, thus my comment about being a teenager could be accurate.

Personally I feel calling someone an asshole less rude and less stupid than assuming "where I live" referred to my cosmipolitan suburb and that I'm a "rich white girl".


You were the one calling someone else an asshole. You don't get to decide what is or isn't less rude to that person.

If I called you a whore, but said "That's not that offensive to me, so it's ok to use it" - that still doesn't mean it's not rude to you.

I know why the ambulance took so long. They diverted both of my ambulances to car crashes.

So your complaint is that the dispatchers did their job?

So, the 911 operator helped the person in need by dispatching the police - and the caller hung up (presumably satisfied that help was on the way).

After that, the operator said their opinion on the matter which in no way affected or hindered the arrival of the police.

And they got fired.

What did they do wrong exactly?

"They" were schizophrenic, apparently.

You were the one calling someone else an asshole. You don't get to decide what is or isn't less rude to that person.

If I called you a whore, but said "That's not that offensive to me, so it's ok to use it" - that still doesn't mean it's not rude to you.

I can decide what I personally think is rude, though.

We will have to agree to disagree here. His job is to get information about what someones emergency is, and then give that info to people who will deal with the emergency. Remaining calm is critical to his job, which is what he did . He got off the phone, he vented. No problem in my book.

We certainly will have to agree to disagree, because that is a problem in my book.

How do you know that? And this just reinforces my point. You knew of the reasons why, the reasons are good, and yet you still think the service is inadequate.

I found out once the ambulance arrived. I think the service is inadequate because it still shouldn't have taken half an hour. I'm not blaming the ambulance drivers. It's moreso the system's fault.


To paraphrase yourself , You, however, are not entitled to assume that I'm a "if it aint broke don't fix it" idiot. I have never said the ambulance service couldn't be better. My continual use of the word "adequate" I would think shows that.

Well I don't think "adequate" is good enough.

One of my very strong traits in this forum is rampant socialism. Rampant socialists believe in a very efficient, fully paid for health system. That means I think the ambulance can be better, but both examples posited (the original caller saying what he said, and your just over 1ml/second bleed) were examples of the ambulance service doing well enough.

You still don't understand though: if it was even .5 cm to the left, it would've cut my achilles tendon. If it was a little deeper, it would've cut an artery. They didn't know if I was ever going to walk again. And even if they somehow magically knew I'd be alright, 30 minutes in a city where it normally takes 10 isn't acceptable.

I wouldn't raise this last part, but you keep with the insults, so I think you have made yourself fair game. Is the reason you got so annoyed, was that my assumptions were accurate in part. In another thread your good knowledge of GPA shows someone who is still in, or just out of the American education system, thus my comment about being a teenager could be accurate.

I'm not from America. Congratulations on proving yourself to be a presumptious fool yet again.

I can decide what I personally think is rude, though.


Which is fantastic.

So I can call someone ******, because I don't personally think it's rude. Charming.

Which is fantastic.

So I can call someone ******, because I don't personally think it's rude. Charming.

Yes, you can. Nobody is stopping you (I hope). It doesn't mean other people won't disagree and think you are rude. You can say it though.

You still don't understand though: if it was even .5 cm to the left, it would've cut my achilles tendon. If it was a little deeper, it would've cut an artery. They didn't know if I was ever going to walk again. And even if they somehow magically knew I'd be alright, 30 minutes in a city where it normally takes 10 isn't acceptable.
You have no way of knowing 10 minutes is the usual time. 4 anecdotal cases, does not prove anything. You mentioned multiple people called. They had decent knowledge of your symptoms from multiple sources, and make the correct decision to go to the car accident 1st. You are the one who still doesn't understand. You were bleeding at just over 1ml a second, which isn't that much. They got to you and saved you.

I'm not from America. Congratulations on proving yourself to be a presumptious fool yet again.

Congratulations on keeping up the insults. I notice you haven't disagreed with being a teenager. Do you go to an American school in your home country then?

You have no way of knowing 10 minutes is the usual time. 4 anecdotal cases, does not prove anything. You mentioned multiple people called. They had decent knowledge of your symptoms from multiple sources, and make the correct decision to go to the car accident 1st. You are the one who still doesn't understand. You were bleeding at just over 1ml a second, which isn't that much. They got to you and saved you.



Congratulations on keeping up the insults. I notice you haven't disagreed with being a teenager. Do you go to an American school in your home country then?

Thankyou. Congratulations on deserving them.

I'm not American. I don't go to an American school. And GPA is calculated differently here, thus the confusion. End of story.

Congratulations on keeping up the insults. I notice you haven't disagreed with being a teenager. Do you go to an American school in your home country then?

Also, I'm at university, not at school, sweetheart.

I can decide what I personally think is rude, though.

We know. You seem to decide that a lot. See earlier posts re: sensitivity.

We certainly will have to agree to disagree, because that is a problem in my book.

Finally -- reasonability.

I found out once the ambulance arrived. I think the service is inadequate because it still shouldn't have taken half an hour. I'm not blaming the ambulance drivers. It's moreso the system's fault.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.

Well I don't think "adequate" is good enough.

You survived with no ill-effects. End of story.

You still don't understand though: if it was even .5 cm to the left, it would've cut my achilles tendon. If it was a little deeper, it would've cut an artery. They didn't know if I was ever going to walk again. And even if they somehow magically knew I'd be alright, 30 minutes in a city where it normally takes 10 isn't acceptable.

If, if, if -- if my grandmother had wheels, she'd have been a wagon. Had it cut your tendon, you'd have mentioned it to the dispatcher. Had it cut an artery, some thing. Triage ranking would have been different, and you'd likely have been seen earlier. You're really trying hard to convince us that you were in mortal peril. The more you protest using "if", the more I think you're -- once again -- overreacting.

Also, I'm at university, not at school, sweetheart.

I'm going off topic, but I think you need some debating advice. Wedge debating is pointless. You are in your teens or early 20s. My comment on your lack of life experience is valid. Trying to pick tiny points, such as you are not in America, does not change the fundamental point being true. Also taking such umbrage at the assumptions I made, when some are true, is also poor debating technique.

Don't contradict yourself, Saudi oil gusher and then 2 litres in 30 minutes, which is equal to just over 1 ml per second, are obviously contradictory.

Getting frustrated because the debate is not going how you planned, and then throwing insults just shows a lack of relevant points to refute the argument, is also poor technique.

Anecdotes can not be used to prove a point about the general case. It can only be used to prove that specific case. Your 4 ambulances cases can not be used to show 10 minutes is standard.

Good luck at Uni.

Yes, you can. Nobody is stopping you (I hope). It doesn't mean other people won't disagree and think you are rude. You can say it though.

On here? No, on here it's called flaming and people get punished for it regardless if "they" think it's rude or not. ******, whore or asshole - it's all punishable on here. I think Amor needs to recognise that and tone down her hypersensitive rants.

On here? No, on here it's called flaming and people get punished for it regardless if "they" think it's rude or not. ******, whore or asshole - it's all punishable on here. I think Amor needs to recognise that and tone down her hypersensitive rants.

Puh-lease, the N word doesn't really get punished on here.

I'm going off topic, but I think you need some debating advice. Wedge debating is pointless. You are in your teens or early 20s. My comment on your lack of life experience is valid. Trying to pick tiny points, such as you are not in America, does not change the fundamental point being true. Also taking such umbrage at the assumptions I made, when some are true, is also poor debating technique.

It's not valid, and I'm not about to divulge personal information to prove you wrong. I, personally, would not have the audacity to accuse you of having no life experience. I will, however, repeat that you are presumtious. You may be right about my age, but firstly, you assumed I was American. Secondly, you brought in a thread that had nothing to do with this, in which I admited that GPAs are calculated differently in this country, thus the confusion. Thirdly, you are ignorant enough to think that my age or my nationality is even a factor in this conversation.



Don't contradict yourself, Saudi oil gusher and then 2 litres in 30 minutes, which is equal to just over 1 ml per second, are obviously contradictory.

Because "saudi oil gusher" is an easily defined term. :rolleyes:

Getting frustrated because the debate is not going how you planned, and then throwing insults just shows a lack of relevant points to refute the argument, is also poor technique.

Why thank you, teacher.

Anecdotes can not be used to prove a point about the general case. It can only be used to prove that specific case. Your 4 ambulances cases can not be used to show 10 minutes is standard.

*counts* - 2 x me, 2 x homeless, 1 x dad. Actually, that's 5. And in all of those cases, it took 10 minutes, except the time I cut my leg. I'm not trying to use anecdotes to prove a point, but I will say that IN MY EXPERIENCE they take 10 minutes max.

Good luck at Uni.

That's so sweet. You'd rather say that than admit you were wrong.

Knock it off, people. You've wandered way off topic.

Amor Pulchritudo, so far in this one thread the insults you've used include "asshole", "presumptuous fool", "ignorant" and "idiot", and you've urged another poster to "go fuck yourself".

These are flames.They are also over-reactions.

Other posters have tried to advise you about your debating style and your sensitivity to opposition or mild criticism. I'm joining them: you will have to learn to take it as well as give it.

I was seriously considering a forum ban to underline the point, as you've heard this before and not acted on it. I haven't banned you because, as several others have said, most of the time, you're an asset to the forums. But you are on notice: get over it, or you'll be having some time out.

That's the kind of mistake that warrants no second chance. You don't tell people that call you that they're lying or that you don't care. You send help, and have them pay for abusing the line if that was the case.


He didn't tell her that. HE said that AFTER he put down the phone.

*counts* - 2 x me, 2 x homeless, 1 x dad. Actually, that's 5. And in all of those cases, it took 10 minutes, except the time I cut my leg. I'm not trying to use anecdotes to prove a point, but I will say that IN MY EXPERIENCE they take 10 minutes max.

Actually, in your experience (based on what you've told us) they take 30 minutes max, and have an average response time of just over 13 minutes.

Knock it off, people. You've wandered way off topic.

Amor Pulchritudo, so far in this one thread the insults you've used include "asshole", "presumptuous fool", "ignorant" and "idiot", and you've urged another poster to "go fuck yourself".

These are flames.They are also over-reactions.

Other posters have tried to advise you about your debating style and your sensitivity to opposition or mild criticism. I'm joining them: you will have to learn to take it as well as give it.

I was seriously considering a forum ban to underline the point, as you've heard this before and not acted on it. I haven't banned you because, as several others have said, most of the time, you're an asset to the forums. But you are on notice: get over it, or you'll be having some time out.

To be fair, the "presumptious fool" comment was warranted. How is it acceptable to assume someone has "no life experience", a "rich little white girl" and that they're American and so forth, but it's unacceptable to call them presumptious?

He didn't tell her that. HE said that AFTER he put down the phone.

It still doesn't make it okay.

On here? No, on here it's called flaming and people get punished for it regardless if "they" think it's rude or not. ******, whore or asshole - it's all punishable on here. I think Amor needs to recognise that and tone down her hypersensitive rants.
Meh. It's not so much that you can't do it, just that the benefits don't outweigh the consequences.

To be fair, the "presumptious fool" comment was warranted. How is it acceptable to assume someone has "no life experience", a "rich little white girl" and that they're American and so forth, but it's unacceptable to call them presumptious?

The problem was undoubtedly because of the "fool" part of "presumptuous fool" since that's what makes the comment an insult rather than an observation.

Hello first post.

I worked as an operator for the emergency services for five years and I think the guy deserved to get fired. Not because he wasn't compassionate, but because he was clearly an idiot.

Firstly let me clarify something. Over 80% of ALL calls that come into the emergency services are what are called "irrelevancies". These calls, can be anything from some idiot panicking because their TV broke down just before their favourite soap opera and calling the services for a repair man, through to others watching said soap opera and when a crime is committed phoning in in droves to report it, through to malicious hoaxes, through to just general idiotic weirdos.

Of the remaining percentiles the majority are trivial matters (like losing less than a pint of blood in half an hour :rolleyes:) which seem dramatic to the panicking caller, who normally phones. Then again phones within 2 minutes because from their POV it seems longer. Then again and again until police fire or ambulance arrive.

In the event of REAL emergencies. Such as violence fire or serious accidents normally there are multiple calls from different sources. This can be problematic (for example a car crash on a motorway at rush-hour can block ALL the lines to fire police and ambulance services in an area at which point any secondary or tertiary emergencies cannot connect and the operator has to bear the brunt of the often over-dramatic callers.)

So most of the day of the operator is filled with idiots weirdos complainers and hysterics shouting at them. The emergency service operators are button monkeys, that's all. They take dogs abuse all day and the majority of them I know have become very misanthropic over time, they don't care about what happens at the end of the line, they don't have to. I have heard colleagues deal with a call and come off it shouting things like "I'd gas that fuck and his entire family like they were badgers!!!" no one bats an eyelid.

But that's not what happened here.

What happened is that the operator WAS RECORDED. This is the important part, not whether he said it or meant it had a bad day or was running for Jesus II. It was recorded.

Anyone with any sense in the industry knows not to say things like that on the phone, they tell you in training not to, because such calls can be AUDITED and the services heavily penalised even losing the contract if such things are heard by independent agencies on tape. Bitch all you want, say what you want, as long as there is no evidence that will besmirch the company publicly. Simple as that. Anyone even in training is pretty well aware of that.

So the guy was an idiot, got caught and got kicked. I can almost guarantee it wasn't his attitude, it was the fact there was a record.

Hello first post.Nice first post. welcome High Expectations.

query, have you heard or seen anyone get fired because of an inappropriate comment being recorded?

I worked as an operator for the emergency services for five years and I think the guy deserved to get fired. Not because he wasn't compassionate, but because he was clearly an idiot.

Good post. I think you summarised both major points of view in this thread. Welcome to NS General. :)

Nice first post. welcome High Expectations.

query, have you heard or seen anyone get fired because of an inappropriate comment being recorded?

Thank you. As to your query Yes, frequently. I was given a position by the staff and management to act as a kind of employee champion who liaised between the two and was involved in many disciplinary procedures. Everyone knew, vent if you want (were did take about 1200 calls per 8 hour shift on average) just don't get caught on tape. .

Hello first post.

I worked as an operator for the emergency services for five years and I think the guy deserved to get fired. Not because he wasn't compassionate, but because he was clearly an idiot.

Firstly let me clarify something. Over 80% of ALL calls that come into the emergency services are what are called "irrelevancies". These calls, can be anything from some idiot panicking because their TV broke down just before their favourite soap opera and calling the services for a repair man, through to others watching said soap opera and when a crime is committed phoning in in droves to report it, through to malicious hoaxes, through to just general idiotic weirdos.

Of the remaining percentiles the majority are trivial matters (like losing less than a pint of blood in half an hour :rolleyes:) which seem dramatic to the panicking caller, who normally phones. Then again phones within 2 minutes because from their POV it seems longer. Then again and again until police fire or ambulance arrive.

In the event of REAL emergencies. Such as violence fire or serious accidents normally there are multiple calls from different sources. This can be problematic (for example a car crash on a motorway at rush-hour can block ALL the lines to fire police and ambulance services in an area at which point any secondary or tertiary emergencies cannot connect and the operator has to bear the brunt of the often over-dramatic callers.)

So most of the day of the operator is filled with idiots weirdos complainers and hysterics shouting at them. The emergency service operators are button monkeys, that's all. They take dogs abuse all day and the majority of them I know have become very misanthropic over time, they don't care about what happens at the end of the line, they don't have to. I have heard colleagues deal with a call and come off it shouting things like "I'd gas that fuck and his entire family like they were badgers!!!" no one bats an eyelid.

But that's not what happened here.

What happened is that the operator WAS RECORDED. This is the important part, not whether he said it or meant it had a bad day or was running for Jesus II. It was recorded.

Anyone with any sense in the industry knows not to say things like that on the phone, they tell you in training not to, because such calls can be AUDITED and the services heavily penalised even losing the contract if such things are heard by independent agencies on tape. Bitch all you want, say what you want, as long as there is no evidence that will besmirch the company publicly. Simple as that. Anyone even in training is pretty well aware of that.

So the guy was an idiot, got caught and got kicked. I can almost guarantee it wasn't his attitude, it was the fact there was a record.

Thank god, someone else with call center experience to back me up.

Great post. So basically his crime was stupidty, not lack of compassion?

Great post. So basically his crime was stupidty, not lack of compassion?

Well I wouldn't say a crime, but stupidity only seems to be an asset in international politics, everywhere else people try and get rid of them fast no?

Great post. So basically his crime was stupidty, not lack of compassion?

Yeppers

Hello first post.

I worked as an operator for the emergency services for five years and I think the guy deserved to get fired. Not because he wasn't compassionate, but because he was clearly an idiot.

Firstly let me clarify something. Over 80% of ALL calls that come into the emergency services are what are called "irrelevancies". These calls, can be anything from some idiot panicking because their TV broke down just before their favourite soap opera and calling the services for a repair man, through to others watching said soap opera and when a crime is committed phoning in in droves to report it, through to malicious hoaxes, through to just general idiotic weirdos.

Of the remaining percentiles the majority are trivial matters (like losing less than a pint of blood in half an hour :rolleyes:) which seem dramatic to the panicking caller, who normally phones. Then again phones within 2 minutes because from their POV it seems longer. Then again and again until police fire or ambulance arrive.

In the event of REAL emergencies. Such as violence fire or serious accidents normally there are multiple calls from different sources. This can be problematic (for example a car crash on a motorway at rush-hour can block ALL the lines to fire police and ambulance services in an area at which point any secondary or tertiary emergencies cannot connect and the operator has to bear the brunt of the often over-dramatic callers.)

So most of the day of the operator is filled with idiots weirdos complainers and hysterics shouting at them. The emergency service operators are button monkeys, that's all. They take dogs abuse all day and the majority of them I know have become very misanthropic over time, they don't care about what happens at the end of the line, they don't have to. I have heard colleagues deal with a call and come off it shouting things like "I'd gas that fuck and his entire family like they were badgers!!!" no one bats an eyelid.

But that's not what happened here.

What happened is that the operator WAS RECORDED. This is the important part, not whether he said it or meant it had a bad day or was running for Jesus II. It was recorded.

Anyone with any sense in the industry knows not to say things like that on the phone, they tell you in training not to, because such calls can be AUDITED and the services heavily penalised even losing the contract if such things are heard by independent agencies on tape. Bitch all you want, say what you want, as long as there is no evidence that will besmirch the company publicly. Simple as that. Anyone even in training is pretty well aware of that.

So the guy was an idiot, got caught and got kicked. I can almost guarantee it wasn't his attitude, it was the fact there was a record.

Liability. Excellent post.