|
Originally Posted by NERD
(Post 893539)
And where is alpa? Instead of recommending ALL crews request private pat downs to grind security to a halt and delay all flights, we get a email to cooperate and be professional. Another words, just shut up and accept more BS from the retards at the TSA.
Now, I do agree with you that ALPA should promote a more assertive stance in general about the manner in which we are screened. But when there are transitions going on in the technology, and the methods, and maybe the threats, it seems like it's good advice to tell people not to go solo. I also agree with CVG about the implications of the constant radiation exposure. I think there are a number of basic areas that touch our health and safety, where we have been far too compliant. I think it is time the union goes back to basics, and for the various committees to move out of the shell-shocked stage we've been in from 9/11, through the bankruptcy. They are making far too many assumptions about what the company would be "willing to do", and not enough about what we need to will them to do. I'd like to see more resistance to the dumbing-down of our training, for example, and more focus on long-term health. I am absolutely sick of hearing about minute costs being an obstacle to a healthy life. Abolishing the 50-lbs flight kit is a good start. Keep in mind, however, that I'm also presuming pilots would be interested enough to put in resolutions to that effect, and participate actively in the process to steer the discussion. But since my reps' phones aren't ringing much unless someone's in trouble, and since only 1/12th of us finds it important to participate in surveys, and since few ever vote for reps in the first place, I guess they could assume most everyone is happy the way things are. |
One word . . . Crewpass.
|
Originally Posted by Sink r8
(Post 893569)
I thought the point was to help define options we have, and options we don't have. You can choose to refuse the scan, and I suppose you can also choose to refuse the pat-down, but then you're making choices about your careers that you may not want to be making. It would be irresponsible for ALPA to suggest individual actions other than professional behavior.
Now, I do agree with you that ALPA should promote a more assertive stance in general about the manner in which we are screened. But when there are transitions going on in the technology, and the methods, and maybe the threats, it seems like it's good advice to tell people not to go solo. I also agree with CVG about the implications of the constant radiation exposure. I think there are a number of basic areas that touch our health and safety, where we have been far too compliant. I think it is time the union goes back to basics, and for the various committees to move out of the shell-shocked stage we've been in from 9/11, through the bankruptcy. They are making far too many assumptions about what the company would be "willing to do", and not enough about what we need to will them to do. I'd like to see more resistance to the dumbing-down of our training, for example, and more focus on long-term health. I am absolutely sick of hearing about minute costs being an obstacle to a healthy life. Abolishing the 50-lbs flight kit is a good start. Keep in mind, however, that I'm also presuming pilots would be interested enough to put in resolutions to that effect, and participate actively in the process to steer the discussion. But since my reps' phones aren't ringing much unless someone's in trouble, and since only 1/12th of us finds it important to participate in surveys, and since few ever vote for reps in the first place, I guess they could assume most everyone is happy the way things are. Crewpass What we have, like the author said, is security theatre. We have replaced the welfare to work crowd with the people of walmart as our country's security screeners. I cant personally stomach the professional respect arguement. Although, I do keep my mouth shut at the checkpoints. At the airport I commute out of, most of the screeners are morbidly obese and heavy smokers. I guess getting on the TSA dole is one way to ensure a cheap open heart procedure by the ageof 40. Security? Really? |
Originally Posted by CVG767A
(Post 893546)
Sure, there's a reason for all of this, but that doesn't give TSA carte blanche to introduce a technology that was rushed into production, with insufficient study regarding the effects of repeated exposure.
We're not sure what the effect will be after years of repeated (4x per week, every week) exposure from a properly operating machine. No long-term study was done. We don't know how rigorous the maintenance will be on the devices. Will it be comparable to medical equipment? Doubtful, IMO. I chose to "opt out" of the scan while on my way to training last week. The exam was thorough and uncomfortable. (The screener disliked it as much as I did, FWIW.) If we were to all opt out, the screening process would grind to a halt, and IMO, screening would return to the previous method. When a safe and more effective screening process is developed, I'll be all for it, but I'm not going to facilitate the introduction of this piece of garbage. I wrote alpa after the e mail we got last week, but so far, nothing. I'll be sure to post the reply if I get one (not likely). Be professional? Really? Have 99.9% of us not done this every day? Thanks for the advice, but maybe your efforts should be better spent preventing this eye wash vs. giving up your back yet again with my dues money. |
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 893581)
-------
Crewpass What we have, like the author said, is security theatre. We have replaced the welfare to work crowd with the people of walmart as our country's security screeners. I cant personally stomach the professional respect arguement. Although, I do keep my mouth shut at the checkpoints. At the airport I commute out of, most of the screeners are morbidly obese and heavy smokers. I guess getting on the TSA dole is one way to ensure a cheap open heart procedure by the ageof 40. Security? Really? I agree that there is no logic in the manner in which we're processed, and I agree about the solution. I think we've been pushing for the solution, but think there are bureaucracies and politics involved, and it's also possible the public doesn't particularly want us to be spared. In addition, there are some airlines that learned the hard way that some crewmembers (I'll PM you) need the extra attention. So, farsical as it is, this may be the process we endure for a long, long time. |
Originally Posted by acl65pilot
(Post 893554)
You are correct about the compounding effect that these sort of machines will have on people like pilots and FF's that travel though these devices a lot. Add it to the radiation that we get while flying and it is significant over the life of a career. That is why opting out is your call.
Strip Search: How Safe are Airports' New X-ray Scanners? - TIME |
Picture of the printer from Yemen.
I hadn't seen these pics in the US media. http://www.spiegel.de/images/image-1...eryV9-lxyb.jpg http://www.spiegel.de/images/image-1...eryV9-sbww.jpg http://www.spiegel.de/images/image-1...eryV9-pbtf.jpg (it seems to me this would be difficult to detect with an x-ray inspection) Cheers George |
Originally Posted by BigGuns
(Post 893593)
After reading this Time article I will not got though a backscatter, nor will I allow my wife or defiantly not my kids. Millimeter-wave I will, but backscatter no.
Strip Search: How Safe are Airports' New X-ray Scanners? - TIME |
Originally Posted by Sink r8
(Post 893599)
Thank for posting that. How do we know which is which?
|
George,
They have been all over Fox and CNN this AM. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:29 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands