Screening of crew operating screened air services
By now we are all aware that all pilots must be screened who operate screened air services. This decision has been taken by someone who simply does not understand the environment in which airline crews operate, or, apparently, aviation security in general. I have taken the liberty to write a letter to the Minister, which I will also copy to my local federal member, senators, the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General.
I invite all of you affected by this measure (and those who are not but who agree with the sentiment) to copy my letter, change any parts you wish and then send it in aswell. (and copy it to you local member etc.)
Woomera, any chance you can sticky this thread please?
Let's not just lay down and take this rubbish - we all want a secure workplace and robust industry, but ridiculous "security" measures like this are not on and we must take a stand together.
*************************
The Hon John Anderson
Deputy Prime Minister
Minister for Transport and Regional Services
Parliament House
CANBERRA ACT 2600
Dear Minister
Screening of crew operating screened air services
As you are aware, the Aviation Transport Security Act 2004 and the Aviation Transport Regulations 2005 commenced on 10 March 2005, and one of the requirements of this legislation is that crew operating a screened air service must be screened.
In the past, crew who entered their aircraft through other than the sterile area did not have to be screened. In many cases, it was and still is impractical for operating crews to enter their aircraft though the sterile area. It was not uncommon for crews to sign on for duty and proceed directly to the apron and onto their aircraft. Now, we must detour via the terminal and be cleared at the screening point. This activity can literally take up to an extra hour before pilots (and indeed cabin crew) can arrive at their aircraft. Think of the magnitude of the extra cost imposed upon airlines as a result of this requirement.
Many additional security requirements imposed under the new legislation will add costs to the aviation industry. However, pilots understand that most of these additional requirements add to the safety of ourselves and to our passengers, and therefore accept these increased security measures. Indeed, the Government is to be applauded for bringing Australia to the forefront of aviation security - but what security outcome does the mandatory screening of crew deliver?
First we must consider who has access to a screened aircraft parked on the apron of a security controlled airport. The list is long. Most of these people do not need to be screened before entering the airside area (including the security restricted area), but nor should they be. These include baggage handlers, caterers, cleaners, engineers etc. However, pilots must be screened, and pilots, unlike any of the groups just mentioned, require additional background checking as part of the Flight Crew License issue. Surely, something is not quite right here.
You may argue that none of the groups mentioned (apart from the pilots) are actually on board the aircraft when it is airborne. This is of course quite correct, however, it is a moot point unless you go on to argue that a pilot would attempt to hijack his own aircraft! If this were to happen, it would happen whether the pilot was screened or not. Remember, pilots are already in the flight deck and can carry certain items through a screening point that could be used to incapacitate a fellow crew member. Apart from anything eles, items considered to be"weapons" already reside in the flight deck of screened aircraft. Surely there can be no argument here. Any person with access to the security restricted area who has not been screened has the opportunity to put something untoward on an aircraft. If pilots must be screened, then surely every person with access to a parked screened aircraft must also be screened.
Minister, the legislative requirement to screen crew must be discontinued. It delivers literally no security outcome, but it does cause significant cost and inconvenience to aircrews and airlines alike. I am aware that some security measures exist more for public perception of increased security, rather than actual increased security. I am not arguing that that is necessarily a bad thing. But this requirement does not even deliver on favourable public perception. I am certainly not advocating that crew who do board their aircraft through a sterile area before entering the airside area be exempt from screening. That would certainly not do much for public perception or security in general. But crews must be allowed to board their aircraft through other than the sterile area and therefore not be screened.
Regional airlines in particular will feel the full brunt of this requirement. Pilots arriving on an aircraft which has not been screened (from, say, Moree to Sydney) will not be allowed to enter the sterile area at the arrival port until they have been screened. Therefore, before they enter the terminal on their "turn around" to collect paper work etc, they will have to subject themselves to screening. This extra process may take up to 30 minutes. But regional aircraft (indeed all aircraft) are on tight turn arounds and this additional requirement may well mean the difference between profit and loss, and therefore jobs. It is simply impractical, and again, delivers absolutely no security outcome.
I understand that with a package of legislation so large, and covering so many people, it would be near impossible to get it completely right the first time. The mandatory screening of crew is one of those things that you did not get right the first time around. I therefore ask that you remove this requirement from the legislation at the earliest possible date, and in the meantime, that you grant an exemption to operating crews so that they only need to be screened when entering their aircraft through the sterile area.
Your Department, while consulting on and implementing the new security framework, has forged a positive relationship with the aviation industry for perhaps the first time in history. You and they should be commended for this. Do not let this issue turn the relationship sour, because pilots (and airlines) will not put up with this ridiculous requirement for long. I await your earliest advice.
Yours sincerely
applehead
Commercial Pilot
13 March 2005