FA's and KCM
 

Many are pushing for FA's to become part of KCM.

I can think of numerous reasons not to. Others have made arguments to me.

Looking for your reasons why it would compromise safety.

Personally, I would rather give up KCM and go back to the the security lines for the rest of my career than take a chance with FA's being in KCM.

Huh? We go through background checks the same as pilots, so what's your issue? Also, as a charter airline FA, I have DOD clearance as well so I can make the argument I'm more qualified for KCM than most pilots.

I don't think it can happen anyways because doesn't KCM use CASS? I doubt the airlines would want to pay to put the FA's in it.

This is a professional pilot forum, fyi.

Agreed, but we've seen FA's ride the coattails of pilots work in the past. Not that this is my particular issue with this.

I know what it is and I was responding to your question. Apparently, you didn't expect a FA to be on this site and offer their opinion. I guess you were just looking for fellow pilots to agree with you. I'm not sure why you'd rather go backwards instead of allowing FAs to be part of this program. What does allowing the same security procedure you're afforded with the same (or better) background check matter to you? Not trying to be snarky, but it doesn't take anything away from you or the way you're dealt with at airport security checkpoints. :confused:

I would like to hear the reasons, just asking.
FAs DO go in the cockpit IN FLIGHT you know!, alone one on one with one of the pilots, with out being in CASS.

Bad idea. Its a LOT easier to get someone "inside", even with a background check, when all it takes is 3-5 weeks of training. The vast majority of FA's could be trusted by default, but then again so could the vast majority of pax. It only takes one, and letting an extra hundred thousand or more go through that way is just begging for a very big issue at some point.

I do know. I also know that I have flown with some that I would NOT want to bypass security and possibly come up to the cockpit with a weapon, or even possibly have a weapon in the back. I also know that they have a lot less invested in this career than we do, so to throw it away would mean less. (see JetBlue FA, what if that nut job brought something to work and then instead of popping the slide, pulled something on the passenger that was giving him a hard time). I have nothing against FA's. I am not saying they need a weapon to accomplish something, but for some it sure would help. Not a chance I want to take.

I am sure I am not the only one that feels this way.

Wow.....btw, there are items we can use on the aircraft that could be considered a "weapon." I seem to recall some pilots who were caught trying to carry weapons through TSA. Let's not even get into some FDOs who shouldn't be anywhere near a gun, muchless be allowed to have one in the cockpit. Did you get burned in a relationship by a FA?

Just curious---do you have issues with rampers and other airport employees bypassing TSA altogether? I know I do.

Also, what's your take on "crazy" pilots. I don't think I need to give examples but they can cause a lot more harm than a FA. Just sayin'......

Although you MAY have gone through the same background checks as pilots, flight attendants are not required to go through the same background checks. Some carriers do them, some don't. With the reciprocity of jumpseating becoming more prevalent, I am opposed to the notion. ALPA national is supporting it, for they see it as easier to garner support for pilot involvement in KCM and the former IATA paying for it