Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Regional
XJT Pilot Stands Up to TSA >

XJT Pilot Stands Up to TSA

Regional Regional Airlines

XJT Pilot Stands Up to TSA

Old 10-17-2010, 07:26 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: 7ER B...whatever that means.
Posts: 3,797
Default XJT Pilot Stands Up to TSA

This was posted on our company forum but I think it bears reposting here since it is an issue that affects us all, not just as pilots but as Americans. I posted it here in the regional forum because it is one of the most active forums and the one I frequent the most. I hope the mods won't bury this somewhere since it is such an important issue.

My name is Mxxxxxx Rxxxxxx, and I am a pilot for ExpressJet Airlines, Inc., based in Houston (that is, I still am for the time being). This morning as I attempted to pass through the security line for my commute to work I was denied access to the secured area of the terminal building at Memphis International Airport. I have passed through the same line roughly once per week for the past four and a half years without incident. Today, however, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agents at this checkpoint were using one of the new Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) systems that are currently being deployed at airports across the nation. These are the controversial devices featured by the media in recent months, albeit sparingly, which enable screeners to see beneath people’s clothing to an extremely graphic and intrusive level of detail (virtual strip searching). Travelers refusing this indignity may instead be physically frisked by a government security agent until the agent is satisfied to release them on their way in what is being touted as an “alternative option” to AIT. The following is a somewhat hastily drafted account of my experience this morning.

As I loaded my bags onto the X-ray scanner belt, an agent told me to remove my shoes and send them through as well, which I’ve not normally been required to do when passing through the standard metal detectors in uniform. When I questioned her, she said it was necessary to remove my shoes for the AIT scanner. I explained that I did not wish to participate in the AIT program, so she told me I could keep my shoes and directed me through the metal detector that had been roped off. She then called somewhat urgently to the agents on the other side: “We got an opt-out!” and also reported the “opt-out” into her handheld radio. On the other side I was stopped by another agent and informed that because I had “opted out” of AIT screening, I would have to go through secondary screening. I asked for clarification to be sure he was talking about frisking me, which he confirmed, and I declined. At this point he and another agent explained the TSA’s latest decree, saying I would not be permitted to pass without showing them my naked body, and how my refusal to do so had now given them cause to put their hands on me as I evidently posed a threat to air transportation security (this, of course, is my nutshell synopsis of the exchange). I asked whether they did in fact suspect I was concealing something after I had passed through the metal detector, or whether they believed that I had made any threats or given other indications of malicious designs to warrant treating me, a law-abiding fellow citizen, so rudely. None of that was relevant, I was told. They were just doing their job.

Eventually the airport police were summoned. Several officers showed up and we essentially repeated the conversation above. When it became clear that we had reached an impasse, one of the more sensible officers and I agreed that any further conversation would be pointless at this time. I then asked whether I was free to go. I was not. Another officer wanted to see my driver’s license. When I asked why, he said they needed information for their report on this “incident” – my name, address, phone number, etc. I recited my information for him, until he asked for my supervisor’s name and number at the airline. Why did he need that, I asked. For the report, he answered. I had already given him the primary phone number at my company’s headquarters. When I asked him what the Chief Pilot in Houston had to do with any of this, he either refused or was simply unable to provide a meaningful explanation. I chose not to divulge my supervisor’s name as I preferred to be the first to inform him of the situation myself. In any event, after a brief huddle with several other officers, my interrogator told me I was free to go.

As I approached the airport exit, however, I was stopped again by a man whom I believe to be the airport police chief, though I can’t say for sure. He said I still needed to speak with an investigator who was on his way over. I asked what sort of investigator. A TSA investigator, he said. As I was by this time looking eagerly forward to leaving the airport, I had little patience for the additional vexation. I’d been denied access to my workplace and had no other business keeping me there.

“Am I under arrest?” I asked.

“No, he just needs to ask you some more questions.”

“But I was told I’m free to go. So… am I being detained now, or what?”

“We just need to hold you here so he can…”

“Hold me in what capacity?” I insisted.

“Detain you while we…”

Okay, so now they were detaining me as I was leaving the airport facility.

We stood there awkwardly, waiting for the investigator while he kept an eye on me. Being chatty by nature, I asked his opinion of what new procedures might be implemented if someday someone were to smuggle an explosive device in his or her rectum or a similar orifice. Ever since would-be terrorist Richard Reid set his shoes on fire, travelers have been required to remove their footwear in the security line. And the TSA has repeatedly attempted to justify these latest measures by citing Northwest flight 253, on which Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab scorched his genitalia. Where, then, would the evolution of these policies lead next?

“Do you want them to board your plane?” he asked.

“No, but I understand there are other, better ways to keep them off. Besides, at this point I’m more concerned with the greater threat to our rights and liberties as a free society.”

“Yeah, I know,” he said. And then, to my amazement, he continued, “But somebody’s already taken those away.”

“Maybe they have,” I conceded, watching the throng of passengers waiting their turn to get virtually naked for the federal security guards.

As a side note, I cannot refrain here from expressing my dismay and heartbreak over a civil servant’s personal resignation to the loss of civil liberty among the people by whom he is employed to protect and serve. If he no longer affirms the rights and freedom of his fellow citizens, one can only wonder exactly what he has in view as the purpose of his profession.

The TSA investigator arrived and asked for my account of the situation. I explained that the agents weren’t allowing me to pass through the checkpoint. He told me he had been advised that I was refusing security screening, to which I replied that I had willingly walked through the metal detector with no alarms, the same way I always do when commuting to work. He then briefed me on the recent screening policy changes and, apparently confused, asked whether they would be a problem for me. I stated that I did indeed have a problem with the infringement of my civil rights and liberty.

His reply: “That’s irrelevant.”

It wasn’t irrelevant to me. We continued briefly in the conversation until I recognized that we were essentially repeating the same discussion I’d already had with the other officers and agents standing by. With that realization, I told him I did not wish to keep going around and around with them and asked whether he had anything else to say to me. Yes, he said he did, marching indignantly over to a table nearby with an air as though he were about to do something drastic.

“I need to get your information for my report,” he demanded.

“The officer over there just took my information for his report. I’m sure you could just get it from him.”

“No, I have to document everything separately and send it to TSOC. That’s the Transportation Security Operations Center where we report…”

“I’m familiar with TSOC,” I assured him. “In fact, I’ve actually taught the TSA mandated security portion of our training program at the airline.”

“Well, if you’re an instructor, then you should know better,” he barked.

“Really? What do you mean I ‘should know better’? Are you scolding me? Have I done something wrong?”

“I’m not saying you’ve done something wrong. But you have to go through security screening if you want to enter the facility.”

“Understood. I’ve been going through security screening right here in this line for five years and never blown up an airplane, broken any laws, made any threats, or had a government agent call my boss in Houston. And you guys have never tried to touch me or see me naked that whole time. But, if that’s what it’s come to now, I don’t want to enter the facility that badly.”

Finishing up, he asked me to confirm that I had been offered secondary screening as an alternative “option” to ATS, and that I had refused it. I confirmed. Then he asked whether I’d “had words” with any of the agents. I asked what he meant by that and he said he wanted to know whether there had been “any exchange of words.” I told him that yes, we spoke. He then turned to the crowd of officers and asked whether I had been abusive toward any of them when they wanted to create images of my naked body and touch me in an unwelcome manner. I didn’t hear what they said in reply, but he returned and finally told me I was free to leave the airport.

As it turned out, they did reach the chief pilot’s office in Houston before I was able to. Shortly after I got home, my boss called and said they had been contacted by the TSA. I suppose my employment status at this point can best be described as on hold.

It’s probably fairly obvious here that I am outraged. This took place today, 15 October 2010. Anyone who reads this is welcome to contact me for confirmation of the details or any additional information I can provide. The dialog above is quoted according to my best recollection, without embellishment or significant alteration except for the sake of clarity. I would greatly appreciate any recommendations for legal counsel – preferably a firm with a libertarian bent and experience resisting this kind of tyrannical madness. This is not a left or right, red or blue state issue. The very bedrock of our way of life in this country is under attack from within. Please don’t let it be taken from us without a fight.

Malo Periculosam Libertatem Quam Quietum Servitium
This guy has my full support. I will never cease to be amazed how quickly we, as a country founded on the idea of personal freedom and liberty, are so quick to surrender our freedoms to a government that has our best interests in mind (or so we are told But that's a different discussion). I refuse to believe that The Founders cast off the tyranny of one oppressive regime 230 years ago just for us to surrender much of that freedom since the attacks on September 11th with less than a whimper from most Americans. Every time I read about some invasive new TSA directive or other madness, I can't help but ask myself what is it exactly that we are trying to defend? I mean, if we are no longer afforded the basic human right to clothe one's self, whats the point? Every time one of these machines is used, the terrorists win another small victory. Every time you take your shoes off to go through security, the terrorists are winning. I recently read a statistic that if you added up the amount of time we as Americans spend removing shoes at security, it is the equivalent of 14 lifetimes per year. So Richard Reid failed in setting off his shoe bomb, but we waste the equivalent of 14 lives each year removing our shoes. A sobering thought.

If you're wondering, the Latin at the end of original quote reads "I prefer liberty with danger to peace with slavery". I agree.
freezingflyboy is offline  
Old 10-17-2010, 07:41 PM
Gets Weekends Off
detpilot's Avatar
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Trying not to crash
Posts: 1,215

I support this pilot, and agree with the latin phrase. However, I don't think it was the smartest idea to decide to just go home when told that you'd be frisked. I agree completely with him opting out of the naked scanner (I think I would, as well), but is a physical pat down, however pointless, worth not showing up to work? This is the same pat down that has been given for years to those customers who get the "magic S's" on their boarding pass, and it is no more invasive than a law enforcement pat down.

If it were me, I'd have opted out of the scanner, let them pat me down, and been on my way into work.
detpilot is offline  
Old 10-17-2010, 07:52 PM
Gets Weekends Off
flynwmn's Avatar
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 515

It is the same pat down only for another two weeks. Their SOP changes in two weeks.
flynwmn is offline  
Old 10-17-2010, 08:11 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: Doing what you do, for less.
Posts: 1,790

lolwut is offline  
Old 10-17-2010, 08:30 PM
Gets Weekends Off
TurboFan's Avatar
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: A320 FO
Posts: 279

Although I have my issues with the ACLU, if I were this pilot, I would be contacting them immediately. They'd have this on CNN and other news networks by tomorrow morning. I couldn't agree more that things are being taken to an extreme level in regards to airport security these days. I as well have refused a AIT scan, however instead of receiving an immediate pat down, I had to wait 3-4 minutes.

Good luck on your fight brother! We should all be so brave.
TurboFan is offline  
Old 10-17-2010, 08:32 PM
Super Moderator
Diver Driver's Avatar
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Tiki bar
Posts: 2,626

Another reason, among many, that we need to continue the push for CrewPASS.
Diver Driver is offline  
Old 10-17-2010, 11:57 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Trip7's Avatar
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,161

This person has some kind of complex. Caused all that drama just because they are too proud to do a pat down? REDICULOUS!

Refuse the body scanner, ok. But get off your high horse, get patted down, and go to work.
Trip7 is offline  
Old 10-17-2010, 11:59 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Trip7's Avatar
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,161

Originally Posted by TurboFan View Post
Although I have my issues with the ACLU, if I were this pilot, I would be contacting them immediately. They'd have this on CNN and other news networks by tomorrow morning. I couldn't agree more that things are being taken to an extreme level in regards to airport security these days. I as well have refused a AIT scan, however instead of receiving an immediate pat down, I had to wait 3-4 minutes.

Good luck on your fight brother! We should all be so brave.

We should all be so stupid and anal

Getting frisked after refusing the body scanner is not taking it to an "extreme level"
Trip7 is offline  
Old 10-18-2010, 12:15 AM
Gets Weekends Off
Cycle Pilot's Avatar
Joined APC: Mar 2008
Position: DAL Pilot
Posts: 1,129

I'm not going through one of those scanners just from a health standpoint. I haven't been convinced that they're not a cancer risk. In fact, some articles I've read have referenced studies showing an increased chance of skin cancer. We're exposed to enough radiation as flight crews... I don't want more! I will, however, take the patdown as a secondary screening. It's annoying, but no big deal to me. I think this gentleman's story has to be read with an open mind as there are two sides to every story. I wouldn't put it past the TSA to treat a crewmember in this way, though.

We need CrewPass in a BIG way!
Cycle Pilot is offline  
Old 10-18-2010, 12:18 AM
Day puke
FlyJSH's Avatar
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Out.
Posts: 3,852

After having to go through special screening to dead head right after i flew the same plane in, I agree: things have gone too far.

I understand the metal detectors: they do provide a measure of safety from mentally deranged persons who might try to take over an aircraft. But the whole idea of TSA is to lock the barn door after the horse has been stolen. All they do is protect us from a plot that has already failed. Unfortunately, those who wish to do us harm learn very quickly and are not likely to repeat a failed attempt.

Prior to 9/11 we were taught to comply with a hijacker's request. That is why the terrorist were able to take control of the aircraft. Since then, we crewmembers and the general public have intervened during an act of air piracy and have been able to contain the situation. We should give the average Joe a vote of confidence, and do away with the layers of ridiculous, reactionary TSA.
FlyJSH is offline  
Related Topics
Thread Starter
Last Post
06-12-2015 04:31 AM
07-08-2010 06:20 PM
09-13-2009 09:00 PM
11-24-2008 08:45 AM
04-28-2008 06:45 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Thread Tools
Search this Thread