Man saves woman's life; is fired for it.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2007-06-21 01:07am

'You're fired,' man hears after saving a woman's life

The 24-year-old grabbed a gun before going to help his neighbor who had been shot.

By Jim Schoettler, The Times-Union

When a neighbor screamed she'd been shot, Colin Bruley grabbed his shotgun, found the victim and began treating her bloodied right leg.

Tonnetta Lee survived Tuesday's pre-dawn shooting at her Jacksonville apartment, and her sister and a neighbor praised Bruley's actions. But his employers, the same people who own the Arlington complex where Bruley lives, reacted differently. They fired him.

Bruley, a leasing agent at the Oaks at Mill Creek, said he lost his job after being told that brandishing the weapon was a workplace violation, as was failing to notify supervisors after the incident occurred. He'd worked at the Monument Road complex since December and for the owner, Village Green Cos., since 2005.

Bruley said he was too shaken to call his supervisor immediately after the incident, which occurred just before 2 a.m., but planned to eventually do so. He also said he was acting as a citizen, not an employee, and shouldn't have been punished for trying to protect himself and others. He never fired the shotgun.

"I was expecting work to give me some kind of commendation," said Bruley, 24. "I was totally blown back. It was a crisis that most people don't go through."

Andrea Roebker, the company's director of public relations, said "We're not in a position to discuss any employment issues outside of [with] the employee.

She declined to comment further, citing confidentiality rules.

A complaint Bruley said was given to him by his supervisor Tuesday said he violated several company policies found in an employee handbook. Those procedures were also explained in a recent meeting and an e-mail, the complaint said. One policy prohibits any type of weapons being used in the workplace. The complaint cited him for "gross misconduct."

"Colin demonstrated extremely poor judgment in responding to this situation," the complaint said. "Colin's failure to immediately report this incident ... could have serious ramifications to the property, its associates and residents."

A police report said the shooting followed a domestic quarrel involving Lee, 24, and her boyfriend. Bruley said he was dozing off in his apartment when he heard Lee's screams. He said he then grabbed a 12-gauge shotgun he uses for protection and hunting.

Bruley said he found the woman bleeding heavily. He handed the shotgun to a neighbor, tied a tourniquet around her right leg and waited for police and rescue to arrive.

"I was kind of in a state of shock. I had blood all over my body," Bruley said.

After emergency officials took Lee to the hospital, Bruley returned to his apartment and tried to settle down, eventually falling asleep. He said he could have called his supervisor but didn't think she could do anything at the time. He said he was called into the office about 9:30 a.m., gave his account and then left. He said he was called back that afternoon and told he was fired.

Neighbor Kevin Courson joined Bruley at the crime scene when he saw Bruley had a gun for protection. Courson said he is incensed by the dismissal.

"Here was a guy trying to do a good deed. He wasn't trying to hurt nobody," said Courson, 31.

Erica Jenkins, Lee's sister, said Bruley should still have a job. Lee couldn't be reached to comment despite several messages left with her sister and mother.

"If it wasn't for him ... she could have lost her leg or died," said Jenkins, 19. "He put his life in jeopardy for someone else."

Bruley said he is considering contacting a lawyer about his dismissal, but will first look for another job and possibly another home. He promises he won't shy away from aiding others in need.

"If I'd lose my job again for helping some girl's life ... I'd do it over and over," Bruley said.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2007-06-21 01:22am

Unless this leasing agent was on the clock before dawn, I'm not clear as to how the owners can make a "workplace violation" claim stick, particularly since the fellow lived there.

Eulogy · Post by **Eulogy** » 2007-06-21 01:27am

I can only hope that as this story spreads, the company that fired gets bit in their ass many times, causing at least severe financial hardship for many years to come. This shit isn't right.

PeZook · Post by **PeZook** » 2007-06-21 01:35am

I can only imagine how pissed that PR woman must be at the management now. They are probably pressuring her to "Make it all better", and what the hell was she supposed to say to the press? "Yeah, we fucked over a good man. But we can do that. We're a corporation, ya know."

I too hope the company gets hammered for that. Way to encourage people to intervene and save lives - it took guts for this guy to rush out of his apartment like that, seeing as there could've been a gunman on the loose.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-06-21 01:36am

Unless it specificially states in his employment contract that he is expected to be 'on duty' at all times when on the property, then I don't see how what he did can be construed as a workplace violation. The most they really seem to have on the guy is his failure to call a supervisor, but seeing as how he's not a security guard, I don't see why he should have even been expected to do so. Unfortunately, Florida is a right to work state, so the company can fire him for whatever reasons they damned please, as long as it's not in violation of state and federal anti-discrimination laws. Since the company shitcanned him, he's gonna have to fight tooth and nail for unemployment benefits, unfortunately.

Eulogy · Post by **Eulogy** » 2007-06-21 01:55am

Flagg wrote:but seeing as how he's not a security guard, I don't see why he should have even been expected to do so.

But he did. He saved her out of the goodness of his heart. And the braindead shitheads employing him fired him for doing this good deed. You honestly don't see why this is bad?

darthdavid · Post by **darthdavid** » 2007-06-21 02:01am

Eulogy wrote:
Flagg wrote:but seeing as how he's not a security guard, I don't see why he should have even been expected to do so.
But he did. He saved her out of the goodness of his heart. And the braindead shitheads employing him fired him for doing this good deed. You honestly don't see why this is bad?

He was saying, I believe, that he doesn't see why there was an expectation for him to call his supervisor, not that he doesn't see why he save the lady...

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2007-06-21 02:02am

Eulogy wrote:
Flagg wrote:but seeing as how he's not a security guard, I don't see why he should have even been expected to do so.
But he did. He saved her out of the goodness of his heart. And the braindead shitheads employing him fired him for doing this good deed. You honestly don't see why this is bad?

Did you read the first part of the sentence you quoted? He said that he shouldn't have been expected to immediately call a supervisor. The wording isn't exactly unclear.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-06-21 02:03am

Eulogy wrote:
Flagg wrote:but seeing as how he's not a security guard, I don't see why he should have even been expected to do so.
But he did. He saved her out of the goodness of his heart. And the braindead shitheads employing him fired him for doing this good deed. You honestly don't see why this is bad?

That quote you grossly took out of context was me wondering why he was expected to contact his supervisor over his participation in the incident, not about expectations that he be a good citizen, dumbass. And furthermore, I never said it wasn't bad that he got fired you braindead, illiterate little fuck. I said that in Florida, as long as they stay within state and federal anti-discrimination laws, employers can fire you for whatever fucking reason they damned well choose. Reading is fundamental.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » 2007-06-21 02:10am

Rogue 9 wrote:
Eulogy wrote:
Flagg wrote:but seeing as how he's not a security guard, I don't see why he should have even been expected to do so.
But he did. He saved her out of the goodness of his heart. And the braindead shitheads employing him fired him for doing this good deed. You honestly don't see why this is bad?
Did you read the first part of the sentence you quoted? He said that he shouldn't have been expected to immediately call a supervisor. The wording isn't exactly unclear.

I don't see why he was expected to call his supervisor at all. He could easily inform them of what happened when they come in to work that day. It's securities responsibility to notify supervisors of shit like that, unless part of his job description is to handle security matters like that. But seeing as how he's a lease agent I don't see how that could be the case, unless the company is extremely cheap.

Unfortunately he's going to have to really fight for unemployment benefits, since the employer decided to give "workplace misconduct" as the reason for his termination.

CaptainChewbacca · Post by **CaptainChewbacca** » 2007-06-21 02:30am

After getting fired from my first job, my employers did the same thing to me. He can most likely appeal that to a judge and get a hearing. At that hearing, the shits from the company likely won't show up, and I'm betting a dozen crackerjack lawyers would represent him for free.

He'll get a new job, I'd wager dollars to donuts.

Siege · Post by **Siege** » 2007-06-21 03:00am

He might get his job back after legal action, but if I knew my employer was the type that would fuck me over after I did something like this, I wouldn't even want to work for them anymore.

Post by **Broomstick** » 2007-06-21 05:51am

Eulogy wrote:
Flagg wrote:but seeing as how he's not a security guard, I don't see why he should have even been expected to do so.
But he did. He saved her out of the goodness of his heart. And the braindead shitheads employing him fired him for doing this good deed. You honestly don't see why this is bad?

I don't see anyone arguing it's anything but bad. Don't let your emotion run away with your debating skills.

Despite the reputations the Americans have for being gun-toting crazies, there's a substantial number who believe you should never, ever get involved in violent confrontation and no matter what ALWAYS wait for the police to show up. Even in matters of self defense. Which I personally think is batshit insane but there you go. It may be this guy had the misfortune to work for such people.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2007-06-21 07:29am

Hm, it might be related to the fact he had the shotgun at all...

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2007-06-21 11:20am

Keevan_Colton wrote:Hm, it might be related to the fact he had the shotgun at all...

Unlikely. If there was a rule against having firearms in the complex, he'd have been evicted.

If you mean it might be related to the fact that he had it with him when he went to help the gunshot victim, well, that'd be the most retarded thing I've ever heard. Someone had just been shot; if there's a madman with a gun on the loose, I should think he'd rather be prepared for it when going to help.

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2007-06-21 12:43pm

I also don't see why he would need to phone his supervisors if the police took a statement.

What, he's going to tell them a more complete story than the cops?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2007-06-21 12:45pm

If the guy was a building superintendant, I would be more inclined to see the company's position; the job of a superintendant is to keep watch, he's basically on-duty all the time, and he's supposed to always inform the building owner of any significant event ASAP. That's part of the well-known job function of a building superintendant. But a leasing agent?

PeZook · Post by **PeZook** » 2007-06-21 12:47pm

Axis Kast wrote:I also don't see why he would need to phone his supervisors if the police took a statement.

What, he's going to tell them a more complete story than the cops?

I guess since he lives in an apartment complex owned by The Company he owes loyalty to The Company first and foremost, and he should report any suspicious activity against the interest of The Company as quickly as possible! Long live The Firm! Loyalty, Work, Dedication! We own your fucking life!

At least I think some people in that company reason this way.

Aaron · Post by **Aaron** » 2007-06-21 01:34pm

PeZook wrote:
I guess since he lives in an apartment complex owned by The Company he owes loyalty to The Company first and foremost, and he should report any suspicious activity against the interest of The Company as quickly as possible! Long live The Firm! Loyalty, Work, Dedication! We own your fucking life!

At least I think some people in that company reason this way.

Sounds like he works for Weyland-Yutani, I guess that means he forfeits his shares.

Post by **Coyote** » 2007-06-21 01:37pm

If the company owner/manager doesn't like guns, or the idea that someone in his employ/on the premesise has one, this may be a bit of rules nitpickery being used to justify getting rid of the rescuer.

Or it may not be political at all, it may be hyperactive CYA reflex-- stories abound of "the robber that broke in and slipped, then sued the house owner and won damages"; the owner may be thinking "what if our hero actually shot the attacker, and the attacker sued for damages and won?"

A liability issue. Doesn't matter how realisitc the scenario is; if the owner believes this to be a potential lawsuit, then he'll act to cover his butt.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2007-06-21 02:01pm

So this is a symptom of an overly litigious america then?

Zed Snardbody · Post by **Zed Snardbody** » 2007-06-21 02:06pm

Thats how it is in that industry, If you take the the discount your company offers and lives on site, your expect to be on call all the time. It sucks. I only tolerated it because it was the only way I could afford an apartment at the time.

The part that the story doesn't tell you is that now that this guy is fired hes more than likely going to lose his home. Employee leases aren't that forgiving and he probably only has 5 days to a week to go ahead and vacate now.

Napoleon the Clown · Post by **Napoleon the Clown** » 2007-06-21 06:53pm

Another reason they canned the guy may be that one of his superiors had cause to dislike and wanted rid of him without risking the guy suing are getting unemployment. If he agreed to report such incidents to his supervisor even while off the clock but on company grounds, they have every legal right to get on his ass. Ethically though, I find myself quite bothered by this. If anything the company should reward this guy and get some nice PR. Be it CYA, a superior that hated him, or a legitemite case of the guy failing to do something he agreed to do upon hiring, I can understand the reasons they could have for doing this. But I still can't make myself condone this. Saving a woman's life should have been enough that the worst they did is write him up and that's only if he were to have actually failed in his duties.

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2007-06-21 10:52pm

I can understand the situation. Here, we have higher-ups asking driver why they didn't hit their camera button during a highly traumatic incident, like a passenger having a seizure, or a fight on the bus, or a bicyclist cutting in front of the bus causing the driver to slam on the brakes.

Yeah.

I've been reprimanded for not immediately informing a supervisor when a serious incident goes down. Hey fuckface, who's going to call 911 and gather the information from the driver while I'm waiting for your goddamn rap song to stop playing on your cell phone so I can leave you a message since you refuse to pick up after hours?