Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Random Security Check

Old 17th Dec 2015, 08:50
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: San Fransisco
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Random Security Check

Recently I had a Security fella say "I don't know why I am required to explosive test you as in half an hr you will be in control of a 100 ton bomb going at 1,000km per hr"

"I'm hearing ya mate but it makes the no idea public feel safe"

"Yep" he sighed as we checked out and commented on the talent coming through that morning.


Airport worker suspended for screening Julie Bishop in breach of 'random check' rules
biglanchow is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2015, 09:33
  #2 (permalink)  
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Now officially on Life's scrap heap, now being an Age Pensioner and not liking it one little bit! I'd rather be flying but in the meantime still continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 68
Posts: 2,839
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
The OP and the link provided merely proves, if indeed any proof is required the absurdity of these 'random' tests.

I wish Chimbu Chuckles still frequented this site as he had several stories to tell of these situations, one of which was really absurdity writ large!

From memory it concerned some Security scanner who wished to take a Leatherman tool away from him because he might.........

If one uses the search function you might even find his post telling of this event.
Pinky the pilot is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2015, 10:22
  #3 (permalink)  
601
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia
Age: 76
Posts: 1,395
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 3 Posts
So how does one determine what is a random check?

The security person, when the get out of bed, decide, for that day, they will check every pollie who are wearing high heals?
or
Check every blond person wearing a blue top?
or
Every fifteen person?
or
Someone at the behest of a fellow worker?
601 is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2015, 11:04
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Up The 116E, Stbd Turn at 32S...:-)
Age: 81
Posts: 3,050
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
I dunno either....

Just about every time we go thru the 'frame with no door', Mrs G gets asked to submit to the 'random test'......

I have been 'selected' only ONCE! ('Honest' face I guess....)

I dunno what they are looking for, 'cause she is white, Caucasian, usually smiling....and, did I say of 'Welsh' origin.

Perhaps that's it!

Its going to be a 'problem' one day, as she is a very keen gardener, and if its the day after she's been 'doing the roses'....

CHEERS to all 'screeners'....

Keep smilin'....
Ex FSO GRIFFO is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2015, 11:09
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The correct procedure is that is required to be random and continuous. By that I mean as soon as one test is completed, the very next victim that passes the screening point must be selected. Once that's complete then the next is selected.

Of course we all know that's not the way it happens. As Ms Bishop clearly found recently.
IsDon is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2015, 13:58
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why don't you all just walk straight across to the explosives tester? I do, takes a minute tops. They look at me like I'm odd when I stand there waiting for them to finish. But I refuse to go further unless they test me.
The name is Porter is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2015, 14:07
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 75
Posts: 1,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You have me intrigued there, Porter - May I ask why?
Stanwell is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2015, 16:02
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Up The 116E, Stbd Turn at 32S...:-)
Age: 81
Posts: 3,050
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Maybe 'Mr P' has just finished 'looking after' his prize roses......and is waiting for the "Come with me Sir'....as the fertiliser residue is detected......

No 'fertiliser residue'.....

No Cheers either....nope...none at all..!!
Ex FSO GRIFFO is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2015, 16:05
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Asia
Posts: 2,372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
As far as I know only a Head of State is automatically exempt from security screening. Requests for other exemptions are dealt with individually.
Metro man is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2015, 20:34
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 75
Posts: 1,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
While she might be getting a bit ahead of herself, Julie does consider herself to be 'Queen of Australia' since Bronwyn's demotion.
I noticed also that the media reports were at pains to point out, in obvious parentheses, that no "official complaint" was made.
Hmm.

Careful, Julie.
Remember, 'One moment a rooster, the next, a feather-duster'.
Stanwell is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2015, 22:10
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It is an absolute disgrace that this bloke should be in trouble. Politians have admitted that the only reason Flight Crew with ASIC access are screened is to appease the punters, "if the Pilots have to do it, how can I complain". If there is psychological benefit in screening the Pilots, the benefit of screening Ms Bishop must have been enormous.
Kelly Slater is offline  
Old 17th Dec 2015, 22:18
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Aww come on guys, it's racial profiling. If your white Anglo Saxon in a uniform your a target. Grow a beard, wear a dish dash and top it off with a doily on your head no problem.
thorn bird is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2015, 02:53
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Stanwell, every time I'd go through security I'd get tested (profiling, don't tell me it doesn't go on), I look like a tradie most of the time, the type that would like to shoot and hunt etc. I got a little tired of it so I just stand there and wait now, they don't like it when you play their game
The name is Porter is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2015, 04:21
  #14 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: San Fransisco
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Looks like they got the boot

Last edited by biglanchow; 18th Dec 2015 at 04:23. Reason: Can not seem to load the correct article
biglanchow is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2015, 04:21
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Smaller Antipode
Age: 88
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The LAX body scanner thinggy recently showed up about 10 large yellow blobs of "suspicious" areas around my body, even around me ankles ( shoeless feet, even tho' over 75 and not required to take off my shoes the metal scanner went beserk tho' no metal was found when the shoes were almost torn apart)

I was duly "checked", and not in a private room, and found to be totally clear. I asked why "their" machine had shown up so many false positives ? I still await an answer, or apology. Breath is not held.

One might not be so upset if one knew that it wasn't all a monumental waste of time. The Bad Guys will do exactly what they want precisely when they want to do it. One must be seen to be doing something of course, but where has the commonsense gone ?

I think prominent politicians should be "randomly" checked, it might eventually get through to them what they have inflicted on the rest of us, and of course "pour encourager les autres" - us.

World's Gone Mad.
ExSp33db1rd is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2015, 04:41
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 2,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
One of them has now been fired.

At least three Melbourne Airport workers were suspended - and a security guard has lost his job - as a result of the botched security screening of Foreign Minister Julie Bishop.

Fairfax Media can reveal the Turnbull government played a direct role in forcing the airport's investigation into the departure gate debacle, despite the repeated insistence of Ms Bishop's office that "no official complaint" was made.

Ms Bishop was singled out to be scanned on her way through Melbourne Airport to New York on September 22.
Advertisement

Workers at the screening position were later suspended amid evidence their selection of the Foreign Minister was "not random" and therefore breached airport security protocol.

But mystery has surrounded what initially prompted the investigation.

A spokesman for Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss confirmed on Friday that his office had contacted Melbourne Airport to raise concern about the incident after being "informally notified" about Ms Bishop's treatment.

He said: "Our office was informally notified of the incident and no action was requested or sought in relation to it.

"The DPM's [Deputy Prime Minister's] office raised the matter with the [Transport] Department and Melbourne Airport. Melbourne Airport undertook an investigation and acted accordingly."

The government's direct hand in the matter appears to place a question mark over an official response by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

It was asked on notice in November about the incident.

The question submitted by Labor Senator Catryna Bilyk​ asked: "Has the Foreign Minister ever been involved in any incidents, altercations or complaints relating to directions to subject herself to security screening at Australian ports, in relation to body scanners or other devices or procedures?"

DFAT responded: "No."

The female worker who conducted the scan was found to have "not adhered to standard security screening procedures" but has since been reinstated after undergoing further procedural and customer service training.

But the male co-worker who instructed her to screen Ms Bishop has been sacked.

Melbourne Airport said in a statement: "A male ISS worker's employment was terminated as a result of not adhering to standard security screening as required at an Australian international airport."

It is understood that a third worker, a woman, at the same position was also stood down as the matter was investigated.

The sacked worker initially sought advice on an unfair dismissal action, but is believed to have reached a financial settlement with the airport that may have included a confidentiality agreement, a source close to the disciplinary process said.

He was covering in the screening position for a fellow worker who needed a bathroom break when he recognised the Foreign Minister, a regular VIP through the airport.

During the investigation, the man was told that Ms Bishop had felt "uncomfortable" at his presence in the screening.

Ms Bishop's office has turned down all requests to explain any action taken after the incident. A spokeswoman said on Friday that there was nothing to add to the minister's position outlined on Thursday.

"Neither the minister nor anyone from her office has made any official complaint regarding her transit through Melbourne Airport at any time," her Thursday statement said.

But a number of airport workers who contacted Fairfax Media on Thursday and Friday said it was common knowledge that the airport had acted on a complaint from government.

An airport worker said: "It was made very clear to people throughout the airport that complaints had come down from Canberra, including the Transport Department and a minister's office."

Talk about the incident had done the rounds of the union movement despite the union covering ISS workers in Melbourne, United Voice, attempting to keep a lid on the matter once the female worker was reinstated.

That led to Senator Bilyk submitting the supplementary question on notice as part of the October 22 Senate estimates hearing for DFAT.

Read more: Julie Bishop screening: government questioned airport before staff were suspended
Follow us: @smh on Twitter | sydneymorningherald on Facebook
neville_nobody is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2015, 07:01
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: WA
Posts: 1,291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A little digging has revealed that the said screening officer was in the shite not because he screened the Foreign Minister but rather that he/she deliberately targeted her. Maybe a fan?
YPJT is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2015, 07:47
  #18 (permalink)  
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Now officially on Life's scrap heap, now being an Age Pensioner and not liking it one little bit! I'd rather be flying but in the meantime still continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 68
Posts: 2,839
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
Devil

Possibly a bit of 'Industrial action' by the Union may be forthcoming?
Pinky the pilot is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2015, 09:35
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Oz
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sounds like said Security Person got sacked for Abuse of Power.

Little sympathy from me if that is the case.
Square Bear is offline  
Old 18th Dec 2015, 09:55
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
How are peolpe 'randomly selected'?
Does that mean that if someone is known, or looks familiar, you can't screen them?

All the baddies have to do is 'get known' and then they can't be 'randomly selected ' because that would go against the 'random' selection protocols
allthecoolnamesarego is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.