Does the employee have a duty to get involved ?

[overkill556x45]

Does the employee have a duty to intervene? NO. In fact, my last civilian employer had a policy which was just the opposite. Bad stuff goes down and you call 911 and make note of anything they might need to know (car make/model, time of offense, etc). Definitely do not get in the middle of it.
My previous experience is that of closing with and destroying the enemy on the field of battle. I am not afraid of a fight, but here in the US--unarmed, unarmored, and with no particular authority--my ability to help others and detain or stop the bad guys is conspicuously constrained. Add that on to a non-intervention company policy and the only option you have left is to call 911 and hope for the best.

I'll let the L.E. experts wrangle this one. All chest thumping aside (if I had my CCW, I'd have lit that guy up kind of talk), most employers have a NO GUNS policy, making the CCW option moot. If my only weapon is a spatula (or a box cutter for my old job), I'm calling 911 and letting the cops sort it out.

[TEDDY]

the courts have held that the police are not required to respond but to KEEP THE PEACE.and many accasions have accured where people died because of lack of police reponses.I would imagine the employeewould be expected to remove trouble makers from the property to prevent damage to the business.
now how would respond if the BG had beat the woman to death while waiting the 2/3 hrs for response from police.It has happened more than once.seems tho something bad was going to happen as the BG had a gun and was willing to use it.

[Sigma 40 Blaster]

I am not in the insurance industry and have no interest in that scenario at all.

Worker's comp is for people who get hurt in the normal line of duty. If a McD's employee trips in the kitchen and breaks their arm that is covered.

Hero action is not covered under workman's comp, and probably was actually against company policy. If that case is ruled in favor of the employee there'll be questions as to what the company's obligation is to employees and their patrons as well.

If an employee is killed in a robbery do they owe anything to the beneficiary of the employee? Does workman's comp? If an employee prevents a robbery by shooting a bad guy and inadvertently hits a customer by either over penetration or just a bad shot does the company or workman's comp owe the customer? That's what insurance companies are for. And unfortunately lawyers too.

Don't get me wrong, the guy was heroic and acted on more guts than a lot of people have. But that is an act of personal sacrifice that is not covered specifically under workmen's comp. If that guy had insurance and benefits he has insurance coverage that should pick up a lot of medical expenses, maybe sick time/vacation time and definitely FMLA time to secure his job.

As far as the employee having an obligation to intervene? Absolutely not. We all have job descriptions and duties spelled out pretty clearly. If we decide to act on the behalf of a patron or a friend that is a personal decision. Completely. There'll be macho guys, mall ninjas, and protector of sheeple that say differently but the reality is we owe and are obliged only what we are willing to give as individuals.

[longcoldwinter]

No good deed goes unpunished.

[wishin]

1. The employee was wrong to intervene. (Never get involved in a domestic dispute - employee or not).

2. The hero was right to intervene. (At an assumed risk for doing something stupid).

3. Workers comp should not have to pay med expenses.(They always look for a way out anyway).

4. The employer should step up and pay med expenses. (Great PR).

5. The hero should be commended. (A parade would be nice).

6. Too bad he didn't shoot the SOB instead of tackling him. (Then there would really be an outcry from the anti-gun idiots).


7. All fast food employees should be issued ARs. (make up for low wages).

All tongue-in-cheek of course!!

[vranasaurus]

now how would respond if the BG had beat the woman to death while waiting the 2/3 hrs for response from police.It has happened more than once.seems tho something bad was going to happen as the BG had a gun and was willing to use it.

A simple domestic abuse situation does not normally end with someone being beaten to death.

He should have called the police, waited, and monitored the situation. If it appeared that the women was in danger of serious bodily injury or death then intervening would have been appropriate. Getting slapped doesn't equate to either of those possibilities. No one said that he simply had to make a decision to not get involved and go about his day never reexamining the situation and changing his response. As the situation changes so should the response.

Getting involved should be your last resort and only when it appears that doing nothing could result in serious injury or death.

[BillCA]

Again, I consider this invokes a question regarding not heroics but expectations of the people who make up our socitety.

Claims that the worker did something that's "not part of his job" fail, IMO, utterly. Workers at McD's are burger flippers, bottle washers, cashiers and floor sweepers as part of their duties. Yet, if Emilita's clothing catches on fire after contacting the grill and another employee is burned beating out the fire with his hands, Worker's Comp pays for injuries to both parties. I know this for a fact.

Nothing in the employee's duties require these heroic actions. Nothing in the employee handbook suggests an action should've been taken. There's no law that requires it. Yet Worker's Comp paid off on the claim.

The primary question is how far can or should the employee go? Did this employee overstep the limits of reasonable actions? Before you say yes...

A man who will beat his wife or a child, especially in public, deserves to be stopped by force. The application of the force should be proportionate, of course. Certainly a punch to the snoot is warranted, if nothing else to let him know such behavior has its consequences. But cutting his throat is only a momentary pleasure and is bound to get you talked about.

He has certainly comitted a crime again a person - a family member at that, but what about you? Or the others nearby? Have you and they not had their peace disturbed? If no one intervenes, what does that teach our children who witness the act? That no individuals in our society have the testicular fortitude to stand up for the weak and the oppressed?

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. --Edmund Burke

And what of the people like him who find no one willing to to interfere? Or even comment? Does not the silence and lack of action embolden his actions, knowing as he does it will take, at best, long minutes before police arrive? His actions are no better than the thief or robber who's actions declare their contempt by the rules we live by. And if those ordinary rules are held in contempt by him, so are all those who obey those rules. His assault on a family member is a public declaration that a person's safety is dependent upon his whim.[1]

The guiding principle here should be that the young man acted in the interest of protecting a woman[2] from abuse and physical harm. The difference, if any, between punching this loathesome male in the snotlocker and tackling him is a testament to the employee's reluctance to harm him.

Some may side with the insurance company who can find a way to weasel out of covering him for his action. But I look at their refusal as hammering another nail in the coffin of a civil society over not principle, but of greed.


[1] In previous generations it would not be unusual for nearly all the nearby men to publicly confront the man for assaulting his wife. Physical force may or may not have been used, but certainly shame and scorn were heaped upon him along with threats of the police needing a mop and bucket to get him to jail.
[2] The same can be applied to protecting a child, the eldery or disabled. These are people unable to defend themselves.

[imthegrumpyone]

In most of the post it seems to be like the old saying "Let George do it" unless the shoes on the other foot, than you're looking for help in any direction. It's amazing how some people seem to think they are shadowed by an LEO when in need.

[renegadebuck]

I was a bouncer in college and usually, the sooner you can intervene the better and less violent the outcome. That said, tackling the BG wasn't the way to go about it. If I had been there, I would have stepped up, as even though women can and do push your worst buttons, most cannot stand with a man in a fight. The GG was right to react, but went about it the wrong way. Saying what would or would not have happened is mute since the GG stepped up. Most replies to this situation are assuming that it would have ended with the punch/slap. Had it escalated, there's no telling how violent it would or would not have become and how much force would have been necessary to stop it.

[Double Naught Spy]

4. The employer should step up and pay med expenses. (Great PR).

The owner of the franchise should come up with $300K? I highly doubt the PR would be that good. It would be nice if the employer helped, but covering everything is a bit overboard. $300K is a huge chunk of change, even for a McDonald's like this.

While it might be okay PR for a brief while if the employer came up with the cash, maybe the intended victim's family should come up with the $ instead as she was the one who was saved?

No good deed goes unpunished.

The employee isn't being punished for his good deed. He simply is not receiving the benefit of help from his employer's workers comp insurance as the injury did not come as a result of doing his job. As such, he doesn't qualify for the benefit.

[Kleinzeit]

Does not the silence and lack of action embolden his actions

I don't think anyone is advocating silence and a lack of action.

[DieHard06]

A good post with some excellent points BillCA. It's good to hear various points of view on this incident.

[Bud Helms]

Moving this to L&CR.

[Socrates]

First: NEVER get involved in a gunfight without a gun.
ALWAYS assume a dirtbag is armed, and be ready to respond.

The days of a good old fist fight being the end of it are gone.
Anyone out of control enough to slug his girlfriend is likely to be very dangerous.

The employee does not have a duty to intervene, unless he's off duty LEO. That's what 911 is for.

As for the insurance company, they are the blight of our society. That said, Workmanscomp ALWAYS denies claims, and, you have to hire a lawyer to sue for the money. You win most of the time. A good lawyer should win this one, since, I'm sure Macs has a clause in their 'duties' that goes something like, 'any other assigned, or required tasks'. In other words, unless you are committing a crime, on company property, on the clock, you are doing your 'duties'.

[shortwave]

Employee just needed to be alittle more 'streetsmart' in this situation. If he were going to get involved he should have approached things a bit different. In perps state of mind, a few 'sweet-nothings' whispered to perp surely would have caused perp to attack employee. Employee(person) has a right to defend themselves on or off job.

[longcoldwinter]

DoubleNaught, I never said workmans comp should pay. Just pointing out the unfortunate fact that in todays society if you step up to help out someone else in distress, society has a way of making sure you come out worse off.

Business owners and insurance companies will due every thing in there power to make sure they dont pay out any cash for your actions and the local DA is likely make your life miserable if there is any gray areas to your actions. Hell if you use a gun your life will be made miserable even if your actions are lily white. Heaven forbid you accidently hurt the person your trying to help or damage there property, instant sue.

[Double Naught Spy]

DoubleNaught, I never said workmans comp should pay. Just pointing out the unfortunate fact that in todays society if you step up to help out someone else in distress, society has a way of making sure you come out worse off.

But society did not make the employee worse off.

Business owners and insurance companies will due every thing in there power to make sure they dont pay out any cash for your actions and the local DA is likely make your life miserable if there is any gray areas to your actions.

There was no reason for the business owner or the insurance company to pay for the employee's actions, so why are you making them out to be bad guys here? The employee had no duty to intervene and they have no duty to pay for his actions.

The DA isn't prosecuting him or doing anything bad to him either, so why are you making the DA look bad here?

Hell if you use a gun your life will be made miserable even if your actions are lily white.

A gun and so the whole gun issue is moot in this case.

[longcoldwinter]

DN this hero is being punished/rewarded for his actions. His reward is being called a "hero" by some in society as well as gaining what ever moral comfort he may be getting from doing the "right thing". As for his punishment well the same society sure is not lining up to pay his medical bills now are they.

That's what you get when you go to defend another person. You do a good deed, you put yourself on the hook for cripping finacial ruin and possible legal trouble. In this case the hero is luckly so far hes not getting sued or arrested, its not always like that.

[quick]

"It is not your duty to get involved in a non-life-threatening situation."

I would say that this statement alone is one of the major problems with our country. It is our community, our neighborhood. If I saw a man slap a lady you better believe I would be right in the middle. Not to be some hero, but as a matter of upbringing and morals.

It makes me want to puke when I hear "be a good witness" yes, but the message coveys to people not to get involved, stay in their bubble.

Vent over

Rick

[Old Wanderer]

I have to jump in here...

1. Sue the SOB that shot him, and hound him till the day he dies....

2. Get a junk yard dog type attorney and go after the employers insurance company.

This very same thing almost happened to me back in the 70's. I was working as a Pilot/Bodyguard in Columbia. One Saturday afternoon I was leaving a resturant. Walking through the parking lot to my car I came upon a Man holding a woman by the throat with one hand whith her head against a car, and smashing it with his fist...blood was everywhere. I grabbed him and proceeded to start breaking a few painful bones when BANG and a shot whisles by my head....hear laying on the ground was the woman that could only see out of one eye holding a revolver and saying in Spanish "Leave my husband alone".

I swung the man beteen us and gave the woman a karatee kick to her one good eye and dropped her husband on top of her....

Would I interveen again.....proabably...but watch the woman this time.

[Double Naught Spy]

DN this hero is being punished/rewarded for his actions. His reward is being called a "hero" by some in society as well as gaining what ever moral comfort he may be getting from doing the "right thing". As for his punishment well the same society sure is not lining up to pay his medical bills now are they.

Because society is not doing something for this guy that society has no obligation to do then it is punishment? You have got to be kidding me. I am continually amazed by the folks who think society owes them something like this and that if society does not pay up, that they are being wronged by society.

So for y'all that think society should be covering this guy's medical bills, how much money have you sent him? If just 300 of you will write out a $1000 check, he will be in the clear, but you aren't likely to do that, are you?

I have a couple of clues for y'all, society is going to pay a lot of the hero's bills. The hero isn't going to pay them and so the loss has to be made up elsewhere, just like with other indigents who get medical care and cannot pay.

2. Get a junk yard dog type attorney and go after the employers insurance company.

And on what grounds would you sue?

[Kleinzeit]

"It is not your duty to get involved in a non-life-threatening situation."

I would say that this statement alone is one of the major problems with our country. It is our community, our neighborhood. If I saw a man slap a lady you better believe I would be right in the middle.

Let's get some clarity here. Not one person in this thread has said that we should not get involved at all.

NOT ONE.

If you ask me, one of the major problems with this country is people who have no sense of proportion. You have here, right in front of you, a very clear picture of what can happen when someone decides to throw themselves "right in the middle." It's a reasonable guess that this guy has slapped his girlfriend before, and that he's going to slap her again. Tackling him has probably not had much impact on that. I doubt it has made the guy go home and apologize to his girl and mend his ways. All it's done is allowed the employee to feel good about his masculinity and gotten him shot in the gut.

Woo hoo.

A call to the police, getting vehicle registration, etc. might have really accomplished something. There is no guarantee it would have, of course. But acting like Chuck Norris doesn't seem to have done much to help the neighborhood, does it? We have a badly injured employee who may never recover his health and may have a greatly reduced quality of life and length of life, and an agitated shooter at large, and people furious at the store manager as if this were all his fault, and distressed citizens who don't feel safe taking their kids to that McDonald's because there was a shooting there, and people picketing the company (which employs people from the neighborhood, whose job security may be threatened by loss of business) because the media has got them in a lather of protest, and alarm in the community because the guy is still out there, and the employee's family members in a state of distress, and the other employees feeling unsafe about going back to work, and family members of the other employees in a state of distress because their sons/daughters/sisters/brothers/nephews etc. etc. were so close to a shooting, and yet another incident giving fuel to the anti-gunners. And so on. And it all started with a slap!

Well done, Mr. Chuck Norris Hero Guy. I feel so much safer now.

[quick]

Again that's why it was a vent. Would I start throwing the guy a beating? I don't know? Would I jump in? yes....... The quote was aimed at the general attitude of people now days. I think this can be argued so many ways it's not even funny. But the "be a good witness" saying is true but most people stop there. I would hope that if the day ever comes when I need someone to step in...or my daughter needs help, that there are good people to step in.

[Kleinzeit]

I would hope that if the day ever comes when I need someone to step in...or my daughter needs help, that there are good people to step in.

I'm with you there.

[ilbob]

The insurance company claimed he was "on his own time" because he'd punched out.

Once he is off the clock, he is off the clock.

While this sounds like the insurance company is being weaselly, really they are just abiding by the terms of the contract they have to provide WC insurance.

It is the same reason that many employers require employees to punch out if they leave the place of employment on personal business (such as lunch).

It is not the employer's fault if someone gets in an auto accident while he is at lunch, anymore than it is the employer's fault that an employee punched out, left the premises and than came back at gun point. At least it is not a WC case. You might be able to argue it from another angle, but it is not WC.