Call your union/congressman about security checks
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: The World
Posts: 388
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PongoPrivatePilot
Maybe the only way we will get meaningful change is to publish each and every one of these absurdities....Then the politicians will pay attention and rein in their Gestapo.
Maybe the only way we will get meaningful change is to publish each and every one of these absurdities....Then the politicians will pay attention and rein in their Gestapo.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No. The only way to get attention is by refusing to board the airplane under these circumstances. If the deadhead crew does not travel, because the pilots are considered a security risk, everyone will notice fairly quickly. Because there won't be any pilots to operate the planned flight at the destination. No pilots, no flights.
There is no law that says you have to give up your human dignity while doing your job. And what about "unreasonable searches" ...?
There is no law that says you have to give up your human dignity while doing your job. And what about "unreasonable searches" ...?
With the advent of deregulated airlines, folk who would once have flown their own Beechcraft from A to B decided to take the easier option of having someone else do the driving. But if that's going to mean waiting for hours before some barely trained idiot gives you a humiliating search in public, no-one is going to put up with 3hr check-ins for a 1 hr flight, followed by more harassment at destination. Perhaps they'll find easier ways - and the wealthier ones will re-discover the freedom of private flying? Certainly people will think twice before submitting their partners to public groping from some failed wheelclamper whose only reply to questions is "No hablo......"
Join Date: May 1999
Location: TMI
Posts: 529
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ehud Barak is not putting up with any nonsense. He refused to remove his shoes at a security checkpoint at Newark International Airport and was allowed to board a flight to Washington.
<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/barak_security020117.html" target="_blank">Barak Stays In Shoes</a>
<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/barak_security020117.html" target="_blank">Barak Stays In Shoes</a>
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 731
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the LA Times it was reported that airline security is to be beefed up more, and a couple of the areas they intend to focus on is airline crews and crew bags. So get used to it; the only changes you will see are for things to get worse.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, this nonsense has to stop.
In case you hadn't noticed the U S Depratment of Transportation is told what todo by the President and the Congress. The FAA , as a part of the Department of Transportation gets told what to do by the Department of Transportation and Congress and the President. And now to "solve" the security problem a transportation security agency has been created by act of Congress. The security problem that existed pre and on 9/11 was that anybody who really really wanted to could get anything (almost) they really really wanted to on an airplane. How has that changed? Not that much I don't think, even though it is now apparantly the provence of the Department of Justice and every other person with a badge to "secure" U.S. aviation. Every sworn officer of every law enforcement organization in the country wants to fly with a gun to help "protect" us. God help us.
Fact of the matter is the Congress doesn't want too much onerous responsibility put on airlines (big campaign donors, don't you know) so we must not hold them too liable. They want to just have a good whipping boy, the FAA! They're just a bunch of dumb civil servants that couldn't get a real job. Lets tell them what to do. And give them all kinds of "help" like Postal Inspectors and national guardsman. Lets see how many near midairs (excuse me, loss of separation incidents)there have been with all the Air Force guys that are using up their flight hours grinding around waiting for something to happen.
Air crew (including the cabin type) shouldbe investigated and security cleared and then maintain their crlearances and not be put upon with this BS>
In case you hadn't noticed the U S Depratment of Transportation is told what todo by the President and the Congress. The FAA , as a part of the Department of Transportation gets told what to do by the Department of Transportation and Congress and the President. And now to "solve" the security problem a transportation security agency has been created by act of Congress. The security problem that existed pre and on 9/11 was that anybody who really really wanted to could get anything (almost) they really really wanted to on an airplane. How has that changed? Not that much I don't think, even though it is now apparantly the provence of the Department of Justice and every other person with a badge to "secure" U.S. aviation. Every sworn officer of every law enforcement organization in the country wants to fly with a gun to help "protect" us. God help us.
Fact of the matter is the Congress doesn't want too much onerous responsibility put on airlines (big campaign donors, don't you know) so we must not hold them too liable. They want to just have a good whipping boy, the FAA! They're just a bunch of dumb civil servants that couldn't get a real job. Lets tell them what to do. And give them all kinds of "help" like Postal Inspectors and national guardsman. Lets see how many near midairs (excuse me, loss of separation incidents)there have been with all the Air Force guys that are using up their flight hours grinding around waiting for something to happen.
Air crew (including the cabin type) shouldbe investigated and security cleared and then maintain their crlearances and not be put upon with this BS>
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The Pointy End
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to keep on guys but you’ve got to get organised. It seems you all agree on this, so present a united front to the people who count.
I do understand about the downturn in passengers, but if you handle it right and make sure you get your concerns across to the public, then you may find yourselves with a bigger stick.
The only way things will change is if you force it. I think it’s always worth remembering that you are trying to secure a real security improvement instead of this window dressing. It will not need a big change to have a separate airside entry point for staff on duty.
In the UK all workers go through a checkpoint. In most airports it is a dedicated channel. We don’t get treated in the way that appears to be occurring in the US.
Off topic: What happened to the thread “Pilot arrested? It seems to have vanished.
I do understand about the downturn in passengers, but if you handle it right and make sure you get your concerns across to the public, then you may find yourselves with a bigger stick.
The only way things will change is if you force it. I think it’s always worth remembering that you are trying to secure a real security improvement instead of this window dressing. It will not need a big change to have a separate airside entry point for staff on duty.
In the UK all workers go through a checkpoint. In most airports it is a dedicated channel. We don’t get treated in the way that appears to be occurring in the US.
Off topic: What happened to the thread “Pilot arrested? It seems to have vanished.
Security must be really good in US airports. My wife flew from San Francisco to Portland last Sunday. Gets into her hotel in Portland, and unpacks her hand luggage. Whoops! She'd accidentally left her pencil case in the hand luggage - with a pair of scissors in it.
And no-one picked it up...
[ 22 January 2002: Message edited by: radeng ]</p>
And no-one picked it up...
[ 22 January 2002: Message edited by: radeng ]</p>
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEAGLE....It's "Habla" not "Hablo". In the U S of A got to learn the "Queen's Spanish" Ooops...Estados Unidos and I can't find that squiggly thing for the "n" on the keyboard.
[ 22 January 2002: Message edited by: Iron City ]</p>
[ 22 January 2002: Message edited by: Iron City ]</p>
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Silly Cone Valley
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every airport should have a staff channel away from the public gaze. I understand that as a British citizen I am obviously a leading Al Qaeda terrorist and public enemy number 1, but could I not be searched in private? I swear the other passengers look aghast and say ‘Hey look, the Feds suspect the Limeys’.
This is all about spin and little to do with security. Safer travel starts with detailed rigorous intelligence work, profiling, and pre-emptive action. Get rid of these bums before they even get to be a threat.
This is all about spin and little to do with security. Safer travel starts with detailed rigorous intelligence work, profiling, and pre-emptive action. Get rid of these bums before they even get to be a threat.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ladies and Gentlemen,. . . .I am afraid that several of you are missing the point. It does not matter who you are, what you are wearing or what ID you are carrying, you have to go through security just the same as anyone else. IDs can be forged - terrorists can take over your house and promise to kill your family slowly unless... etc etc. The only protection is a full and thorough security check for all staff and passengers who board an aircraft, or who work airside.
Inevitably there will be annoyances, inconveniences etc. Security personnel may not be of the highest calibre, and may not be chosen for IQ, tact and obsequiousness. After all would you like a job in airport security? However we have to be big enough to put up with the inconvenience and occasional indignities, and it is important that staff in uniform are seen by the travelling public to set an example of polite and helpful cooperation with security staff, whatever the provocation.
To those of you worried by the requirement for 100% baggage reconciliation - don't be. This has been the norm in Europe for some years, and a few simple procedures can minimise delays. With a little practice a "no-show" pax with hold baggage should not cause a delay in excess of 15 mins, whatever the a/c type.
Inevitably there will be annoyances, inconveniences etc. Security personnel may not be of the highest calibre, and may not be chosen for IQ, tact and obsequiousness. After all would you like a job in airport security? However we have to be big enough to put up with the inconvenience and occasional indignities, and it is important that staff in uniform are seen by the travelling public to set an example of polite and helpful cooperation with security staff, whatever the provocation.
To those of you worried by the requirement for 100% baggage reconciliation - don't be. This has been the norm in Europe for some years, and a few simple procedures can minimise delays. With a little practice a "no-show" pax with hold baggage should not cause a delay in excess of 15 mins, whatever the a/c type.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The Pointy End
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Budgie 69. Please explain how a terrorist holding my family hostage would compel me to allow some hijacker to fly me into a building. I don’t want to rain on your parade but it is the simplest task in the World to get something airside. It does not require taking anything through security. Only morons and journalists try that.
You seem to have retired and do not suffer the indignity of being told to start stripping every time you go to work. I wonder if you would be so laid back about it if it happened to you.
All the crews accept the need for security and screening. Perhaps you could explain to me how removing my nail clippers and ignoring the 18-inch fire axe on the wall behind my seat, will make the flight safer. I am most certainly having difficulty with understanding that.
No one is suggesting that we should not be checked, but it should be conducted in a dedicated crew area. Just like the crew channels you went through and not in public. A security check does not have to border on abuse…come to think of it; doesn’t article 7 of the Human Rights Charter have something to say about degrading treatment?
[ 22 January 2002: Message edited by: max_cont ]</p>
You seem to have retired and do not suffer the indignity of being told to start stripping every time you go to work. I wonder if you would be so laid back about it if it happened to you.
All the crews accept the need for security and screening. Perhaps you could explain to me how removing my nail clippers and ignoring the 18-inch fire axe on the wall behind my seat, will make the flight safer. I am most certainly having difficulty with understanding that.
No one is suggesting that we should not be checked, but it should be conducted in a dedicated crew area. Just like the crew channels you went through and not in public. A security check does not have to border on abuse…come to think of it; doesn’t article 7 of the Human Rights Charter have something to say about degrading treatment?
[ 22 January 2002: Message edited by: max_cont ]</p>
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max 69.
I don't want to get into a long discussion about proxy bombs - but I am sure you can imagine some viable scenarios.
Most of the security checks I went through were the same ones as were used by our passengers, and in full view of them.
I have no doubt that there are currently stupidities, indignities, over zealous "jobsworths" etc. etc. The point I was trying to make is that it is no good trying to buck the system - you just have to put up with it. In time security checks will settle down to a sensible level. The intervening period is unfortunately going to be somewhat tiresome.
I don't want to get into a long discussion about proxy bombs - but I am sure you can imagine some viable scenarios.
Most of the security checks I went through were the same ones as were used by our passengers, and in full view of them.
I have no doubt that there are currently stupidities, indignities, over zealous "jobsworths" etc. etc. The point I was trying to make is that it is no good trying to buck the system - you just have to put up with it. In time security checks will settle down to a sensible level. The intervening period is unfortunately going to be somewhat tiresome.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: The Pointy End
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Budgie69, that’s the point. We can change anything…if we really want to. Remember the poll tax.
The real problem is not only about the way in which crews are singled out for degrading treatment in the name of security, but while this is allowed to masquerade as an improvement, we and the travelling public are still at risk.
Everyone who has airside access should be screened, without exception. To do less leave’s holes in the security screen you could drive a bus through.
It will not settle down, because the new politically appointed heads of security, don’t understand the aviation business. The ethos that only appearances count is dangerous
The new security protocols are a complete culture shock to our US colleagues. We have had this kind of thing in place for the last 30 years, thanks to the IRA. We still get it wrong but we do not implement it in such a ham fisted way. I have always loved the openness of the US way of life, but now things have changed and so must security.
As an example, the crew channel at LGW is strict. You get searched if required and x-rayed, but it is conducted with dignity. I just don’t see why other airports can’t do the same…of course it would require an additional expense and that is probably the real reason.
The real problem is not only about the way in which crews are singled out for degrading treatment in the name of security, but while this is allowed to masquerade as an improvement, we and the travelling public are still at risk.
Everyone who has airside access should be screened, without exception. To do less leave’s holes in the security screen you could drive a bus through.
It will not settle down, because the new politically appointed heads of security, don’t understand the aviation business. The ethos that only appearances count is dangerous
The new security protocols are a complete culture shock to our US colleagues. We have had this kind of thing in place for the last 30 years, thanks to the IRA. We still get it wrong but we do not implement it in such a ham fisted way. I have always loved the openness of the US way of life, but now things have changed and so must security.
As an example, the crew channel at LGW is strict. You get searched if required and x-rayed, but it is conducted with dignity. I just don’t see why other airports can’t do the same…of course it would require an additional expense and that is probably the real reason.
Moderator
[quote]No one is suggesting that we should not be checked, but it should be conducted in a dedicated crew area. <hr></blockquote>
Actually, I AM suggesting just that.........there is no reason at all, in this day and age, to screen working flight crew. It defies logic.
Actually, I AM suggesting just that.........there is no reason at all, in this day and age, to screen working flight crew. It defies logic.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps it's time to open a forum for the security people and invite them to have their say about this from their point of view. At the moment we only hear how they make it hard for the crew/staff, do we know what they have had by way of instruction. I know you shouldn't just use the "just doing my job" argument but as this stands it is a one sided discussion. I personally think things have gone too far with a bit of a knee jerk but rather that than risk more of the same. I truly believe that your best bet would be to ask the head of security to arrange a walkthrough of the aircraft for his people. Show them the fire axe ask them if they think you would use a pair of tweezers when that is available but above all start a dialogue with them. You have to instill the fact that you, just as they, are interested in security. But it would also help if you made them aware that you appreciate the fact that it is your security they are guarding.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK....security folks...now is the time to explain WHY flight crew must be looked at so carefully, considering that they hold the lives of so many in their collective hands.. .Hello?.....Hello??
Moderator
You'd have to frequent the Professional Pilotgropers Rumor Network to get their opinion..... The problem is that since most are unable to speak, much less read and type in english, you have to be fluent in whatever language it is that they do speak! Do they even have computers? They were paid less than the folks working the "slow" food counters at the airports. Now that they are going to be paid more than the average ATR Captain, maybe they can afford english lessons, and a computer!
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: up north
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have any of you actually spoken to these people you delight in slagging off?They have the ultimate responsibility in ensuring that a terrorist does not board your aircraft carrying any offensive weapons that could endanger your aircraft.
I don't know what the situation is like in the USA and if it is as bad as you all say it is then I agree that something should be done. Basic qualifications are a must.
All people boarding an aircraft, and I include crew,should be subject to screening procedures. No pilot should take for granted the security procedures put in place, don't forget, they are for your protection too. Pilots and crew should take responsibility for setting a good example to their passengers. And how well do you know that new member of crew that started last week? Don't forget, the hijackers on those aircraft on Sept. 11th caried pilots licences.
Security staff do their best under very difficult circumstances. Regulations can change from day to day. It is the management of these security companies for not ensuring that their staff are fully trained to do their jobs.
I don't know what the situation is like in the USA and if it is as bad as you all say it is then I agree that something should be done. Basic qualifications are a must.
All people boarding an aircraft, and I include crew,should be subject to screening procedures. No pilot should take for granted the security procedures put in place, don't forget, they are for your protection too. Pilots and crew should take responsibility for setting a good example to their passengers. And how well do you know that new member of crew that started last week? Don't forget, the hijackers on those aircraft on Sept. 11th caried pilots licences.
Security staff do their best under very difficult circumstances. Regulations can change from day to day. It is the management of these security companies for not ensuring that their staff are fully trained to do their jobs.