Firefighters Watch House Burn: That’s Not My Job

Turf is common in all businesses, although its existence makes for an ineffective way to run a business. It also makes it easier for employees to say, “That’s not my job.” Teamwork — everyone working together for a common purpose– is a core value of every employer. Everybody wins. It’s a nice theory, but in reality, it’s a fiction. Both inside and outside the workplace, people seem less willing to help each other — just for the sake of helping.

The recent news out of rural west Tennessee about firefighters who stood by and watched a home burn to the ground underscores our decline in a dire way. Their fire chief forbade them to fight the fire, because the homeowner hadn’t paid the annual $75 fee for fire protection, something used in a lot of rural communities to keep a volunteer fire department going. The  only reason the firefighters were there at all was to keep the fire from spreading to the house of a neighbor who had paid the $75 fee. This transforms workplace turf into the stuff of never-never land.

According to the fire chief, if his crew helped all homeowners who didn’t pay the required fee, nobody would pay the fee — sort of like lessons taught to businesses that refuse to pay gangs or organized crime for protection. That’s just the way it works. One shouldn’t take it personally.

And now to the workplace. An employee won’t help a co-worker because he isn’t paid for that. Or maybe the boss, like the fire chief, prevents his employee from helping out because there’s nothing in it for his department. Helping others out in the ordinary course or when those needing the help are desperate has become passé. Unthinkable indifference is now in style.

1. 

   Nae says:

   October 12, 2010 at 10:03 am

   I think you may have missed the mark here, John. I don’t believe this story relates to the workplace as you described. Employees are paid, whether they help others or not. The fire department here is not in the same boat. It works more like insurance.

   I see the fire chief’s point, but I think he missed the mark too. Of course you don’t want people to get services they haven’t paid for. Why would anyone pay then? That doesn’t mean you let a house burn to the ground either. It is obvious no one really thought it through when they came up with this plan. Who will look on this fire department now without disgust?

   It would have been much better when the town leaders discussed what to do when people refused to pay that they came up with a better plan than let them burn. How about a huge fine? How about paying for the actual costs? How about….? I am sure there are dozens of ways that this could have been handled, had the town leaders really thought this through.

   I think your post should have been on leadership and/or management and making sure your policies are realistic, doable and don’t come back to bite you in the err..end. Just my 2 cents.
2. 

   John Phillips says:

   October 12, 2010 at 12:31 pm

   Nae,

   I always appreciate your comments. They are thoughtful and sometimes critical. Thank you for this one.

   You may be right about my missing the mark, although that’s certainly not the first time. As you know, I like to take current events or pop culture and turn them into something related to HR or employment law. I have been told that I occasionally stretch too hard or too far and end up with something that isn’t on point or makes no sense. I’m not above that.

   I wasn’t too happy with this post but wanted to do something on what I regard as an incredible event. Focusing on management or leadership or thinking through policies before implementing them would have been excellent points of view for this incident. Thank you for making these points in your comment.

   I still think that helping each other out, in and out of the workplace, has lost its appeal. The fact that employees are paid has nothing to do, in my opinion, with the days-gone-by willingness to lend a helping hand.

   Also, people receive services they don’t pay for all the time. Living in a house for months or longer without paying the mortgage. Unemployment compensation. Welfare relief. Health insurance. Bailouts to keep very bad actors afloat. Various types of government subsidies. Lines are drawn, of course, but they are often arbitrary. And, by the way, employees are paid for services they don’t provide.

   An interesting take on this incident that would have perhaps been more employment-related is whether there are times when an employee should disobey his superior’s instructions — become insubordinate as a matter of conscience.

   Anyway, sorry I missed the mark or stretched too far. Thanks very much for weighing in.

   John