Any "Latest & Greatest" about Delta?
10-31-2010, 04:51 PM
veut gagner à la loterie
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: Light Chop
Posts: 23,286
Imagine you're writting a fiction novel about how an outside group could hijack an airliner via a pilot and you could being an insider dream up a multitude of ways to get it done.
10-31-2010, 05:05 PM
Da Hudge
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Poodle Whisperer
Posts: 17,473
Hence why CrewPass needs to be here now. For those of us operating the plane or going to operate it, security screening is pointless and a waste of time.
10-31-2010, 05:06 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,099
If you're really worried about your exposure:
GE Energy - Radiation Monitors
FWIW in my previous life radiation monitors were required to worn every day, all day while in the lab(X-ray crystallography, SEMs). The monitors were sent in for analyzing at the end of each month with the employee receiving a print out of their exposure levels.
GE Energy - Radiation Monitors
FWIW in my previous life radiation monitors were required to worn every day, all day while in the lab(X-ray crystallography, SEMs). The monitors were sent in for analyzing at the end of each month with the employee receiving a print out of their exposure levels.
10-31-2010, 05:08 PM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
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.
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.
Carl
10-31-2010, 05:09 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,099
Question ... why would the schedulers keep you on short call hours after the last aircraft was already airborne out of base. And in a few minutes, all of those flights will have landed at their destination?
Are they worried about someone diverting to the base and might need an extra crew?
Are they worried about someone diverting to the base and might need an extra crew?
10-31-2010, 05:09 PM
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
An infiltrator? Do you mean a cabin cleaner or a paying passenger? Or is Charlie coming over the hill with a satchel charge?
If anyone can get a bogus uniform and id, then it probably would be an easy task for you to accomplish. Until that time, I disagree.
Is the TSA's job to give package checks? Or is it to irradiate us? I ride the employee bus with these people, I listen to what they talk about. They aren't security.
You may have no problem laying down the hard won freedoms that were paid for in blood and handed to you. I, and I hope others do not. When our freedoms go away due to the actions of terrorists or terrorist wannabe's, WE HAVE LOST.
10-31-2010, 05:24 PM
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
All very valid points, and what do you think the results would be if a weapon were used in flight by one of us? What do you think the ramifications would be? I am guessing a lot worse.
I hate going thought the routine as much as the next guy, the difference is that I can understand that there are reasons to do what they do, and we as pilot do not have a "need to know" in regard to these reasons.
I hate going thought the routine as much as the next guy, the difference is that I can understand that there are reasons to do what they do, and we as pilot do not have a "need to know" in regard to these reasons.
Carl
10-31-2010, 05:26 PM
Everyday is a weekend!
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Seasonal Help
Posts: 317
Question ... why would the schedulers keep you on short call hours after the last aircraft was already airborne out of base. And in a few minutes, all of those flights will have landed at their destination?
Are they worried about someone diverting to the base and might need an extra crew?
Are they worried about someone diverting to the base and might need an extra crew?
10-31-2010, 05:29 PM
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: ATL717A
Posts: 890
, I'll just turn a blind eye to such information and hope my government knows what's best for me, and will take care of me, and look out for my best interests. Move along. Nothing to see here.
10-31-2010, 05:32 PM
Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 6,946
I think you're right.
The screening process needs to be 100% successful. Airline pilots are not 100% trustworthy to know what we're doing when it comes to preventing weapons from getting through security. That's a painful fact to acknowledge.
We've had an airline pilot negligently discharge his authorized weapon in the cockpit. [public record] We've had pilots go through "crew gates" with weapons. [public record] We've had pilots try to fly drunk, with weapons. [public record]
As a result, I'm not trusted when I approach airport screening checkpoints. That makes me mad. Not at the schlubs groping my sweetbreads behind the curtain when I refuse the bodyscan, but at the jerks who screwed it up so that we can't be trusted. Pogo had it right...
The screening process needs to be 100% successful. Airline pilots are not 100% trustworthy to know what we're doing when it comes to preventing weapons from getting through security. That's a painful fact to acknowledge.
We've had an airline pilot negligently discharge his authorized weapon in the cockpit. [public record] We've had pilots go through "crew gates" with weapons. [public record] We've had pilots try to fly drunk, with weapons. [public record]
As a result, I'm not trusted when I approach airport screening checkpoints. That makes me mad. Not at the schlubs groping my sweetbreads behind the curtain when I refuse the bodyscan, but at the jerks who screwed it up so that we can't be trusted. Pogo had it right...
Splash,
I don't understand your logic, Are you, or are you not an airline pilot and a legitimate airline employee? If you are, why are they groping you? Maybe you have a weapon in your shorts?
Newsflash to the TSA - There is a friggin axe in every cockpit!!! Either You can verify who I am via my ID or it just does not matter!!!! The TSA is nothing more than eye candy.
If you really want a trully successful screening program you can not be politically correct. You will have to offend people - other than pilots. So Muslims can keep there head-wraps on for religious reasons, but others will have to remove hats/head covers. So are head wraps/hats a threat or not? If they are a threat, then than all come off - sorry if you are offended. If they are OK for devout Muslims (not a threat) Then they should be OK for everyone.
Bottom line - If our IDs can not prove who we are then we are just pretending to be secure.
Scoop
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
