To sue or not to sue, a morale dilemma.

[boo]

Now, if it was a penis....now there's something you don't want to leave behind.

yep..... just another angle
what if it was your daughter and her finger could'nt be re-attached because it wasn't there?
trauma?
should someone have been contacted that DID know what to do?
does the school have a nurse?
I try to look at it from all sides and angles before I cut it > or pass judgement.
as far as the courts and justice system.... they work together every day with insurance companies. another one of those organized crime thoughts as mentioned above?
things that make ya go hmmmmmmmm

 

[BlueRidgeMark]

I try to look at it from all sides and angles before I cut it > or pass judgement.

Kinda hard to do when the only ''facts" we have are that somebody got his finger cut off at a school.

 

[Treeman14]

... Why should people know the difference between "morale" and "moral?" lol

 

[LightningLoader]

Why should people know the difference between "morale" and "moral?" lol

That's been bugging the heck out of me too. Guess that's really what this thread is about though, not "morals", but "morale." As in I should do what will make me feel better and raise my morale. Ahhh the truth that lies in Freudian slips...

 

[CoreyTMorine]

Well, that seems to have struck a raw nerve . It’s true that the courts can make some seemingly outlandish rulings, much to the detriment of society at large. Judges are not infallible, they screw up just like everyone else. But judges are also competitive, they probably censure and review one another, over time this should lead to equilibrium. I have faith that it will.

Ira once said something about having faith that the universe would fulfill his needs. I have grown to share this sentiment. True, sometimes we get screwed or hurt, but life goes on and we rebuild or restructure to meet the demands of the new system.

Many voices here jumped all over my post, without asking questions or taking some time to look more thoroughly at the question. This reflex is exactly what causes people to jump on burning bags of dog ????. Do what you feel is right, my feet are clean.

However there are some misconceptions on this thread that I would like to set straight.

1) This is a story I heard second or third hand. I don’t even know the participants, I’m not trying to convince anyone to sue anyone else.

The idea may not sit well with some folks, but Tort law is a form of oversight in the States; furthermore it the only system of regulation that I see investigating this particular incident. Some law suits are wrong; this fact does not mean that all suits are wrong. Many of the safety devices in our world have come about because of Tort law; Chain brakes, safety bars on the chipper, safer electrical outlets, seat belts, are a few possibilities.

My thought was that a suit filed against the school would force an evaluation of safety protocols that I feel are flawed. I may be wrong on both counts, I am often wrong, which is why I spend time asking questions and simulating possibilities. It’s a lot easier to change your mind before you make the back cut.

2) “Morale” is a misspelling, I meant moral. I’m not really laughing, but it is kind of a funny mistake, sue me.


So if you want to attack my argument you can go after;

Premise #1) Safety training at the school is inadequate.
Premise #2) A law suit is the best way to force evaluation and subsequent restructure of the school’s safety policy.

Or, you can try and prove that premise 1 and 2 do not lead to my conclusion;

Conclusion) The student is morally obligated to sue the school, otherwise more students may be hurt because of a flawed training program.

A few stabs at Premise #1 are interesting, foremost is the idea that “personal responsibility” can get us a long way. I completely disagree with this statement. I spent 6 years in the US Navy, and the rest of my life in the trees, my personal experience is that people take responsibility for their actions up to the point where they are morally justified. Beyond that point they start to make excuses.

A prime example is my buddy “Logger man”, he makes all of his guys wear hardhats, eye pro, saw pants, gloves, no loose clothing around the chipper (incidentally he does this partly because he is afraid of getting sued) but get this, none of his saws have chain brakes! LOL! I asked him about this once, he say’s “god damn things are a nuisance, they didn’t have ‘em when I was learning, they don’t need ‘em now.”

A combination of the Tort system and personal responsibility make “Logger man” act in the best interest of his crew, to the point where he feels morally justified. But once he is justified and when the situation goes beyond “Logger mans” training or experience he starts to make excuses.

If any one can shed a different perspective on this I would be very appreciative. I love training and safety, only a little less so than tree work.

Thanks for your time and consideration of this matter.

 

[CoreyTMorine]

What a bunch of horse pucky!

Wonder how sharp the knives and forks are in the cafeteria and what kind of training program do they have if any?

The student is morally obligated to be bright enough to use an exacto knife by the time they are in college.

Dan

Fair enough TreeCo, can we look at another example?

What about a 27 year old treeguy using a handsaw for the first time? Is there any training required?

Because i gotta tell ya, i cut the heck out of my knee that first year. 2 or 3 times i had my left foot proped up on a branch, which put my left knee in the follow-through if i was cutting on the left side. No stitches or tendon damage so it took a while for me to learn not to do that.

I guess your right in that i never thought about sueing anyone, but it is a hard, dangerous way to learn something.

 

[CoreyTMorine]

What about a 23 year old with a valid drivers license but no experience in a truck? Would you expect him or her to just jump in the chip truck and get it to the job? Or would you make them ride shotgun a few times and give some hints, question them about their driving habits, maybe run some mental simulations?

How about an experienced rope man who has never used a type 3 port-a-wrap? Are you just going to head up the tree and assume he can “figure it out”?

To me these situations do not seem all that different from the student with the exacto knife, or the teacher who became involved in managing the situation. In all circumstances training is required to make sure things are done safely / correctly.

 

[b1rdman]

Because i gotta tell ya, i cut the heck out of my knee that first year. 2 or 3 times i had my left foot proped up on a branch, which put my left knee in the follow-through if i was cutting on the left side. No stitches or tendon damage so it took a while for me to learn not to do that.

Let me make sure I'm getting this right...

You injured yourself MORE THAN ONCE performing that same task, in the same manner, with the same tool (a hand saw)?

How much blood did you loose before you figured out that it's not always someone elses fault?

Were you the college student who couldn't use an exacto knife?

When did you get the "training" that prevented you from sawing into your leg?

or

Are you still sawing into your leg saying "Geez...I gotta gets me some of that saw training"?

 

[CoreyTMorine]

Corey I would think cutting yourself the first time would have been a good lesson to not have your knee in the follow through path.

What possible training could an employer give that would have prevented you from cutting yourself a second and third time if bleeding from your first cut wasn't enough to teach you a lesson?

When I'm showing kids how to work in the tree I make them keep their flip line down low, that way they have to push up with there legs. This does a few things; it strengthens their legs, and it forces them to keep their legs below their butt, and out of the follow-through. I also tell them of my own experience, and how I cut myself.

Granted I didn’t hire on as a knob, and it is unlikely that anyone ever considered the notion that I never used a handsaw. Ownership of those events is completely on me, and fortunately, because damages were limited to a sore knee, I was also able to take responsibility for my mistakes.

I was learning and seeing so much new stuff that first year out west that it took awhile for me to get over my bad habits.

But this is my point exactly, it is dangerous to assume that a person knows how to do something safely. Even something that is common and easy to most people.

 

[b1rdman]

Ownership of those events is completely on me, and fortunately, because damages were limited to a sore knee, I was also able to take responsibility for my mistakes.
.

What does this mean?

Wouldn't you still be responsible if the injury were more serious?

 

[Ollbuster]

So were do you start the training, walking 101. A certain level of common sense is expected of all people at certain times in there lives. If I gave my five year old son an exacto knife without supervision, close supervision I would expect he would cut his finger off. The idea that we have to assume everyone is an idiot is ridiculous. Great site bye the way.

 

[CoreyTMorine]

What does this mean?

Wouldn't you still be responsible if the injury were more serious?

Good question. Let’s look at the definition of responsibility;

Responsibility, n.;1. the condition, quality, fact, or instance of being responsible, answerable, accountable, or liable, as for a person, trust, office or debt.

The source of this definition is Webster’s New 20th Century (Unabridged) 2nd Edition, which was printed in 1964.

In our modern day, no fault, self serving world, the assumption seems to be made that “responsibility” means “moral responsibility”.

In a situation where one is “morally responsible” that person has to shoulder the guilt of a poor decision, and subsequent damages caused by said decision. However, as we were all taught by our mothers and teachers, if you accept responsibility and say “I’m sorry”, all will be well.

If we take the older definition of “responsibility” then any damages from a poor decision must be accounted for, losses must be measured and made good.

In answer to your question; suppose I had really hurt myself, to the tune of 35,000 USD. They would ship me of to the hospital and patch me up, but there is no way that I could repay the thirty five thousand dollars. I did not at the time have the wherewithal to be accountable, or responsible, for my action. That is true of most people who are severely or permanently damaged. So the insurance companies and the government foot the bill, not the injured party.

This is why law suits get so infuriating , because the person who directly caused the accident is so often unable to make good on the damages. In our world it matters not that said damages were received bodily by the very person who caused them. There is still the matter of medical expense and disability, and at the end of the day the scales must balance.

This may scream “unfair” or “wrong”, it may make your skin crawl and bring about a flash of nausea; but this truth is axiomatic. “Loss within a closed system must be made up from within the system, or the system will die.” It is a direct corollary of the 1rst or 2nd law of thermodynamics, and it holds true for economic systems.

I often wonder if this is why many people find tort law to be so unpleasant; because it raises the curtains on moms very comforting notion that if you say sorry, and really mean it, all will be well. Rather a law suit puts things in black and white, it counts the beans, and discharges a bill. Then, in the very pragmatic manner of US law, the bill doesn’t necessarily go to person who deserves it, rather it goes to the entity that can pay it.

 

[b1rdman]

Good question. Let’s look at the definition of responsibility;

Responsibility, n.;1. the condition, quality, fact, or instance of being responsible, answerable, accountable, or liable, as for a person, trust, office or debt.

The source of this definition is Webster’s New 20th Century (Unabridged) 2nd Edition, which was printed in 1964.

In our modern day, no fault, self serving world, the assumption seems to be made that “responsibility” means “moral responsibility”.

In a situation where one is “morally responsible” that person has to shoulder the guilt of a poor decision, and subsequent damages caused by said decision. However, as we were all taught by our mothers and teachers, if you accept responsibility and say “I’m sorry”, all will be well.

If we take the older definition of “responsibility” then any damages from a poor decision must be accounted for, losses must be measured and made good.

In answer to your question; suppose I had really hurt myself, to the tune of 35,000 USD. They would ship me of to the hospital and patch me up, but there is no way that I could repay the thirty five thousand dollars. I did not at the time have the wherewithal to be accountable, or responsible, for my action. That is true of most people who are severely or permanently damaged. So the insurance companies and the government foot the bill, not the injured party.

This is why law suits get so infuriating , because the person who directly caused the accident is so often unable to make good on the damages. In our world it matters not that said damages were received bodily by the very person who caused them. There is still the matter of medical expense and disability, and at the end of the day the scales must balance.

This may scream “unfair” or “wrong”, it may make your skin crawl and bring about a flash of nausea; but this truth is axiomatic. “Loss within a closed system must be made up from within the system, or the system will die.” It is a direct corollary of the 1rst or 2nd law of thermodynamics, and it holds true for economic systems.

I often wonder if this is why many people find tort law to be so unpleasant; because it raises the curtains on moms very comforting notion that if you say sorry, and really mean it, all will be well. Rather a law suit puts things in black and white, it counts the beans, and discharges a bill. Then, in the very pragmatic manner of US law, the bill doesn’t necessarily go to person who deserves it, rather it goes to the entity that can pay it.

That sure is a long winded "NO"...

Is this the way you feel or are you just playin "Devil's Advocate?

 

[CoreyTMorine]

That sure is a long winded "NO"...

Is this the way you feel or are you just playin "Devil's Advocate?

Isn’t that a bit like asking me if I’m bluffing before you call.:taped:

 

[Ekka]

opcorn:

Darn it, you guys haven't even put ya gloves on yet, come lets step it up some. :hmm3grin2orange:

 

[CoreyTMorine]

opcorn:

Darn it, you guys haven't even put ya gloves on yet, come lets step it up some. :hmm3grin2orange:

Sorry Ekka, I'll edit the first post to say "Low entertainment value."

BTW I thought you were kind of a jerk before i got a highspeed connection. Now though, I have to say I'm pretty impressed.

What do you do w/ all of the palm chunkies?

 

[boo]

yep..... just another angle
what if it was your daughter and her finger could'nt be re-attached because it wasn't there?
trauma?
should someone have been contacted that DID know what to do?
does the school have a nurse?
I try to look at it from all sides and angles before I cut it > or pass judgement.
as far as the courts and justice system.... they work together every day with insurance companies. another one of those organized crime thoughts as mentioned above?
things that make ya go hmmmmmmmm

not to ruffle any feathers but, common sense is contradictive of absolute.
I think we should try to use common sense but, not to the point that it steps on absolute.
yep, I quoted myself >

 

[CoreyTMorine]

not to ruffle any feathers but, common sense is contradictive of absolute.
I think we should try to use common sense but, not to the point that it steps on absolute.
yep, I quoted myself >

Can you elaborate on that a little bit there Boo? What exactly do you mean by absolute?

PS did you ever find out anything about your truck?

 

[boo]

absolute > facts.


no word on the truck

 

[b1rdman]

Isn’t that a bit like asking me if I’m bluffing before you call.:taped:

Yes it is isn't it...

Sorry after reading that nonesense I was considering "pulling a Sap on you" (unwarranted slander).

I've calmed down so we're good. If that's the real you then I fold. If it's not then send me the source of that garbage so he/she can be added to "my list".