[quote]You managed to ignore the original post I made which made the point.....
. .quote:. .--------------------------------------------------------------------------------. .Now please don't give us the I can't do that line as if it is important enough to you to go on about it here, then it should be important enough to make your own stand on. I suggested you should try to encourage a team spirit to get round the problem but obviously being a pilot makes you more important than the team. Even if this is only window dressing someone believes it has a beneficial effect and contributes to you keeping your job. You should either put up or shut up. . .--------------------------------------------------------------------------------{/quote]
So, if I read you correctly, I should either quietly submit to this idiocy, or become a martyr to attempt to expose the potemkin village that is "security" in the U.S..
I find it interesting that you, describing yourself as "SLF" aren't concerned that this eyewash harassment of flight crew does nothing to increase security. You defend the practice as beneficial to keeping our jobs, (ostensibly because the average person is too dull to know the difference between eyewash and security). Do you really feel better knowing that the Captain flying your aircraft is free of nail clippers and eyeglass screwdrivers? Do you think that it could prevent him from flying his aircraft into a building, if he wanted to?
As for the "put up or shut up" comment, let me ask you this. Would YOU risk a $180k a year job, several million $ worth of retirement etc, for making a stand? As it stands right now, airline pilots in general are fed up with this issue. There have been several arrested for stating fact (not making threats) at the "security" checkpoints. At least one respected captain has been "psychologically evaluated" (the company was "concerned" about his emotional well being) for writing a letter to a local paper (he made no mention of his employer) describing the idiocy of strip searching a deadheading pilot AFTER he's just FLOWN AN AIRPLANE!
This is what we are up against. ALL of the major pilot unions are working on the issue, but it is falling on deaf ears in DC. It appears, from my small picture perspective, that the government is (like you, it seems....) is more concerned with the PERCEPTION of security, rather than actually addressing the problems.
[quote]The point here is you don't know all of the big picture as, speaking just as SLF, I would find it reassuring to know that nobody is above a thorough security check.<hr></blockquote>
Well, it seems that my "picture" is a bit larger than yours is. Since I am actually subject to this stuff every day, I can see the ludicrousness of the measures. The fact that you find "reassurance" "knowing" that nobody is above a "thorough security check" tells me just how small your "picture" actually is.
In reality, the only airport employees that AREN'T above "thorough security checks" are pilots and flight attendants. It seems that EVERY other employee groups ARE above them. Why else would they have UNFETTERED access to the ramps/aircraft?
. .quote:. .--------------------------------------------------------------------------------. .What do you think will happen if a few of us do this? We will be (are) singled out as examples. . .--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If there are only a few of you who would make this stand then the others don't see it as that important. I'm sure you go to your union when you want a pay rise, use them now. Or aren't they interested either. [quote]
Actually, the unions are working overtime on this issue. They are met with indifference in DC. Unfortunatly, the ONLY thing that will get their attention is a universal S.O.S. (suspension of service). I am not holding my breath on this one, but as this issue becomes even more surreal (federalisation of "security" employees), we will eventually get fed up.
[quote]Don't get me wrong I personally wouldn't like to be subjected to this type of security. <hr></blockquote>
Wel, we don't like it, and it is completely unneccesary. If I thought that removing my belt at security made my passengers, crew and myself 1 iota safer, I'd be all for it. The facts are different.
[quote]Thing is the travelling public feel reassured by these measures so either get used to them or rally more support.<hr></blockquote>
See the above comment about punitive "psych. evals. I would like nothing more than to have my airline ceo get on tv to expose this insanity. THAT would likely rally support for reasonable security easure, instead of eyewash.
[quote] I wish you the best of luck as in this instance I play devils advocate. <hr></blockquote>
Thanks....