Verizon lineman saves cat, gets 3 week suspension for not following safety rules - Sensationalist Headlines

https://twitter.com/SteveLindsayCBS/status/1107071734061170695 ‘Put His Life And Those Around Him In Jeopardy’ It's a US local station so I'll just post the whole thing Maurice German, the Verizon employee credited for rescuing a cat from atop a utility pole in Port Richmond last weekend, was suspended three weeks by Verizon on Friday. But the company says it takes “no joy” in the punishment. German was working in the Port Richmond neighborhood last Saturday when a resident asked him to help rescue Momma the cat, who had been stuck on top of the pole for about 12 hours. German obliged and safely returned Momma to its owner. No one was injured in the rescue, but it put everyone in the vicinity in danger, Verizon said. “We take no joy in this job action,” Verizon spokesperson Rich Young said. “However, we’re committed and responsible for keeping our employees and customers safe while working in a particular area.” Verizon says its field technicians are required to participate in safety training exercises focused on keeping both its employees and customers safe. Its vehicles and equipment are not intended to be used in the area German operated, according to Young. “Unfortunately, while this employee’s goal was admirable, he potentially put his life and those around him in jeopardy,” Young said. “While our actions may not be popular, it’s in the best interest of our employees and the communities we serve.” Young said Verizon is making a donation to the Pennsylvania SPCA in Fishtown to show its support for animal rescue efforts.

Sucks but OSHA would have their asses if they didn’t do anything.

It's cute when companies pretend to care about anything other than stock prices. It thinks its people.

Businesses, much like most politicians, have never, and will never, care about you other than wondering how your wallet can benefit them. Once you accept that fact, behaviour of companies becomes easy to (a) predict, and (b) 'understand', for lack of a better term.

Does this apply to businesses that have 5 employees Or do you think that maybe you're painting with an overly broad brush

Businesses are driven by profit (except ones that explicitly aren't, obviously) above all else. They can portray themselves as moral as possible, but morals won't save them from bankruptcy. At the end of the day, profit over people. So, uh, no, I don't think I am, because that's the nature of business. If anything, I'd think there's a reasonable argument that smaller businesses have a greater incentive to solely prioritise profits because there is more room to fuck up in spheres of tight competition. I vividly remember during one of the recent UK elections that it was owners of smaller-sized businesses that scoffed at taxes and the mere concept of minimum wage because they believed in maximising profit over treatment of people, including their own employees. There will always be slight exceptions, so I should have probably slapped a 'Most' in there, but I don't think that applies to your example, for aforementioned reasons. Exceptions are less likely to exist in this massive industry, however, because of the whole risk factor of business & entrepreneurship.

You forget that businesses do not make their own decisions... Human beings run businesses, and nothing happens without a human being deciding to do it. By saying "nah businesses are just inherently evil" you're just excusing the behavior of bad people while simultaneously refusing to acknowledge the behavior of good people.

For a smaller business, keeping people happy is more important. If one person quits your 5 employee business you've lost 20% of your workforce until you can hire and train someone. I'm not saying they don't genuinely care, but it is probably in their interest to do so.

Hey @garry , this one over here, he needs to go for reeducation.

Humans are shitty creatures and completely capable of being evil and terrible.

...yeah?

This is a really abstract argument and I'm not sure what you're trying to illustrate beyond pointing out that businesses aren't sentient robots. Perhaps 'profit' is too general, but a business' main interest is what benefits itself - even supposed pro-consumerism loops back on itself to benefit companies. Spotify has tried to take a low-cost pro-consumer route for years, and has routinely suffered periods where it suffers a loss (if I remember correctly, so I will gladly be corrected), and only recently are they starting to realise that this can't go on forever. Business exists to incur a benefit - you take a risk, you receive a reward. That is an integral part of business, and I'm not sure why you're responding to that with 'you know humans run businesses, right?'

Sooo, how is that any more dangerous than doing the exact same thing, except working instead of saving a cat?

The problem with this line of thinking is it allows the people who actually make the decisions to absolve themselves of the responsibility of those decisions. Companies do not need to be psychopathic, profit-maximising machines. Prioritising profits above everything else is how bad businesses run, it just so happens that most businesses are bad at business.

AMERICA. Thank you corporations!

From the article it sounds like that type of bucket truck wasn't OK to use in proximity with that specific type of line for whatever reason.

kind of sounds like made up shit just to be that kind of guy that fires people over using a no.2 pencil when it should be a no.3

OSHA is extremely particular about this kind of thing. These guys dick around with the bucket trucks all the time, but once it hits the news the company has to do something. A three week suspension is not that big of a deal for a lineman.

I can say with confidence most companies will act in a self preserving manner. When it comes down to it profit(equated to business viability and survival) will push aside consumer and employee happiness if it will assist in that endeavor. If a business does something altruistic you can bet your ass you will hear about it because it’s in a companies best interest to have good PR.

I guess that is a pretty good middle ground.

OSHA is a bag of dicks when it comes to enforcement. We have to equip our guys with hard hats when they go put mulch or plants in at a house. If the superintendent sees them without the hats on, we get a $5000 fine. Second infraction is a loss of contract.

I mean, I'm glad OSHA exists, because its better than the alternative, but goddamn, there's a lot of times where its just like seriously? They are worried about that?

We plant trees, and bushes. Hard hats are as useful to us as a spoon is to a butcher.

You're not wrong, but it's not an awful generalization to make, as far as generalizations go. You know free market competition breeds the most inhumane of businesses via natural selection.

yes

I like to believe that at my workplace, it's the opposite. Employees are getting sometimes treated with soft gloves and like princesses. It has it's own set of problems. Your statement is a tad to broad man.

I work for a company that tries to keep both their customers and employees happy, because my boss realizes both of these are the foundation of our success. The way I see it, publicly traded companies try to fuck everyone, because they're driven by profits due to shareholders (who often only care about profit). What you are saying is a bit generalizing.

absolutely it does. i've worked in small companies before, bosses are the stingiest mother fuckers who will do anything to keep profits up.

Have you considered that “bosses” isn’t a separate species and actually vary the same way humans do in general? I’ve been in a company that was financially was kinda in the shitter, but that didn’t prevent the owners (and bosses) from being fair with us.

Maybe that's because they have to demonstrate fiscal responsibility in order to keep the company running? It's easy to criticise someone for being "stingy" when you aren't the one having to make sure that people are getting payed and overhead is being covered. Would you rather have a boss that didn't care about money? I've known a few overly generous business owners who managed to run themselves into the ground because they didn't care about profitability only for unexpected expenses or bad times to hit and they found that they had no reserves to fall back on, and business models that weren't conducive to getting loans.