Should Pilots going to work be exempt from scanning by TSA?

[Kathi OD]

I see this as no different from my own daily work experience, and I'm a teacher. However, I teach in a secure facility. Everyone going in the building has to go through a metal detector and pat-down, regardless of their reason for being in the building. Believe me when I tell you, I don't like being patted down when I go to my job each day either, but it's the way it is. If I refuse either one, I don't get in the building. End of story.

This guy works in an environment we know terrorists like to exploit. In order to get on a plane, everyone needs to be screened, regardless of who they are. IMO, that's how it should be. If he doesn't like the conditions of his employment, he needs to find a job.

 

[DawnCt1]

So based on that, should we also get rid of mandatory drug testing for pilots? Afterall, if they really want to kill us, they can just dump the plane; high or not. Why bother screening them for anything?

Of course not. I don't know how you leap from one to another. No one wants an impaired pilot in the plane, either from alcohol or drugs, But I don't know what one hopes to achieve doing enhanced screening on a pilot who has already passed through normal screening, has his ID and flight bag in hand, and is headed for the cockpit. It seems like an unnecessary layer of inconvenience with no discernable gain.

 

[pilotwife_02]

DH does not have a problem being scanned when he goes to work. It is a PITA - of course, but he understands it's part of the job.

Funny story, right after 9/11 he was going through security (in uniform) and had a pair of nail clippers and the TSA gave him a hard time about having them. Of course he had to surrender them but in his head he's thinking "I fly the freaking airplane, I don't need NAIL CLIPPERS to take down a plane".

DH's biggest complaint is that the TSA in every airport has different rules and interprets them differently so there is no consistency and that's what seems to frustrate flight crews more than anything.

 

[AKL_Megs]

As a flight attendant, I think it is useless...

We are allowed to bring as many liquids, gels, and aeresols onto the plane that our hearts desire. I bring with me every day three full size cans of hairspray. Sometimes, we DO go through security, and there is absolutely nothing they can say... And there could be ANYTHING in those cans.

There are still some airports where we aren't even required to pass through security. In our home base, we go from employee parking right into the terminal. Perfect times to bring ANYTHING through.

 

[NHdisneylover]

It's fine to decline the new machine (even if I think doing so is a little silly). However, if you also refuse the pat down, you should not be surprised when you are refused entry to the concourse. If you make this refusal at a time when you are flying for business, you should not be surprised if your employer fires you.

I agree with this 100%

Besides, yes a pilot who wanted to commit suicide could down the plane--but a pilot who wanted to terrorize without committing suicide could smuggle something past security and then hand it off to a passenger on another plane once through (or to several passengers to get issues with several planes).

As a flight attendant, I think it is useless...

We are allowed to bring as many liquids, gels, and aeresols onto the plane that our hearts desire. I bring with me every day three full size cans of hairspray. Sometimes, we DO go through security, and there is absolutely nothing they can say... And there could be ANYTHING in those cans.

There are still some airports where we aren't even required to pass through security. In our home base, we go from employee parking right into the terminal. Perfect times to bring ANYTHING through.

Why 3 full sized hair spray bottles every day

The second bolded really scares me. I had no idea DTW was so lax. Quite honestly I had thought the entire US system while still lacking in many ways was better than that.

 

[LisaR]

Of course not. I don't know how you leap from one to another. No one wants an impaired pilot in the plane, either from alcohol or drugs, But I don't know what one hopes to achieve doing enhanced screening on a pilot who has already passed through normal screening, has his ID and flight bag in hand, and is headed for the cockpit. It seems like an unnecessary layer of inconvenience with no discernable gain.

Because people go off the deep end without any warning. It is the same reason pilots are tested for drugs periodically. They don't test them the day they are hired and never test them again. They get retested because life changes. It isn't any different than screening them. While they may have been totally sane yesterday, it doesn't mean that they haven't lost it today. Sure, it makes sense to just dump the plane if they are suicidal but people that are mentally unstable aren't thinking clearly.

Honestly, my reason for testing pilots has nothing to do with the above conversation. I agree with you that they could easily down the plane if they wanted but I just disagree that they get a green light simply because they have other ways to kill us all.

My number one reason for screening pilots is because if we don't, the terrorists will simply start dressing up like pilots. Our security already sucks. Let's not give them an even easier way to get on the planes.

 

[AKL_Megs]

I agree with this 100%

Besides, yes a pilot who wanted to commit suicide could down the plane--but a pilot who wanted to terrorize without committing suicide could smuggle something past security and then hand it off to a passenger on another plane once through (or to several passengers to get issues with several planes).



Why 3 full sized hair spray bottles every day

The second bolded really scares me. I had no idea DTW was so lax. Quite honestly I had thought the entire US system while still lacking in many ways was better than that.

One is hairspray, one is finishing spray, one is a bottle I keep in my bag in the galley

Detroit isn't lax, they really aren't. But we CAN bring pretty much whatever (aside from nailclippers, as another poster mentioned ) we need through security. Of course, not anyone can bring a gun, but do you all realize...

There ARE some pilots certified to bring guns into the flight deck? Federal Flight Deck Officers. They have extensive background checks, and can go insane, too. One gun, 15 rounds.

Or, ANY pilot, and an airplane loaded with fuel. Who needs a gun, a knife, or nailclippers to go crazy?

 

[AKL_Megs]

Oh. We can't bring butter knives through, either, but there are axes (crash axe) in each and every flight deck. Which would work better, do you think?

Screening flight crews is pointless. The airplane is and will always be a flying weapon.

 

[sbell111]

Screening flight crews is pointless. The airplane is and will always be a flying weapon.

Perhaps, but you can't hand off an airplane to another person in the concourse.

 

[DawnCt1]

I see this as no different from my own daily work experience, and I'm a teacher. However, I teach in a secure facility. Everyone going in the building has to go through a metal detector and pat-down, regardless of their reason for being in the building. Believe me when I tell you, I don't like being patted down when I go to my job each day either, but it's the way it is. If I refuse either one, I don't get in the building. End of story.

This guy works in an environment we know terrorists like to exploit. In order to get on a plane, everyone needs to be screened, regardless of who they are. IMO, that's how it should be. If he doesn't like the conditions of his employment, he needs to find a job.

I see a difference. You cannot kill all of your students without a weapon. A pilot can destroy the plane, either intentionally or by pilot error. Would a police officer be able to enter your facility with a gun? I would expect that he would. He has a privilege based on his level of responsibilities and his duties. I see the pilot the same way.

 

[NHdisneylover]

One is hairspray, one is finishing spray, one is a bottle I keep in my bag in the galley

Detroit isn't lax, they really aren't. But we CAN bring pretty much whatever (aside from nailclippers, as another poster mentioned ) we need through security. Of course, not anyone can bring a gun, but do you all realize...

There ARE some pilots certified to bring guns into the flight deck? Federal Flight Deck Officers. They have extensive background checks, and can go insane, too. One gun, 15 rounds.

Or, ANY pilot, and an airplane loaded with fuel. Who needs a gun, a knife, or nailclippers to go crazy?

Ok now I am a little confused. Earlier you stated that you can go straight from the employee parking into the terminal and it sounded like you do not go through the security screening:
"There are still some airports where we aren't even required to pass through security. In our home base, we go from employee parking right into the terminal. Perfect times to bring ANYTHING through."
Which is it?

 

[NHdisneylover]

I see a difference. You cannot kill all of your students without a weapon. A pilot can destroy the plane, either intentionally or by pilot error. Would a police officer be able to enter your facility with a gun? I would expect that he would. He has a privilege based on his level of responsibilities and his duties. I see the pilot the same way.

Most schools/courthouses, etc would only allow even a police officer to enter with a gun if the officer is on duty-a gun is part of the equipment an officer needs to do his job. A pilot does not have that same need. There is nothing a pilot would need to do his job (that I can think of) that would not be allowed through security for anyone.

 

[AKL_Megs]

Ok now I am a little confused. Earlier you stated that you can go straight from the employee parking into the terminal and it sounded like you do not go through the security screening:
"There are still some airports where we aren't even required to pass through security. In our home base, we go from employee parking right into the terminal. Perfect times to bring ANYTHING through."
Which is it?

Both. When we don't pass through security, it's sort of like the honor system. You know what you can't bring. When we do pass security, we can bring whatever we need (short of guns, knives, bombs... And nailclippers )

 

[NHdisneylover]

Both. When we don't pass through security, it's sort of like the honor system. You know what you can't bring. When we do pass security, we can bring whatever we need (short of guns, knives, bombs... And nailclippers )

Thanks for clarifying! Okay--then I am back to being shocked and dismayed that there is an 'honor system" at times. Terrorists would not feel any compulsions to honor such a system--and they have shown a willingness to put in the time and effort to get jobs and training and be in it for the long haul in order to get "in" wherever they need to be.

The liquid stuff doesn't bother me. I think the rule is pretty silly anyway (more "feel good" and like we are doing something than really for protection) and would be happy if it went away all together.

 

[AKL_Megs]

Thanks for clarifying! Okay--then I am back to being shocked and dismayed that there is an 'honor system" at times. Terrorists would not feel any compulsions to honor such a system--and they have shown a willingness to put in the time and effort to get jobs and training and be in it for the long haul in order to get "in" wherever they need to be.

The liquid stuff doesn't bother me. I think the rule is pretty silly anyway (more "feel good" and like we are doing something than really for protection) and would be happy if it went away all together.

There ARE random screenings... Most DO follow the honor system. We ARE a pretty professional bunch

 

[NHdisneylover]

There ARE random screenings... Most DO follow the honor system. We ARE a pretty professional bunch

Oh, I did not mean to indicate that you or the other FA's are not professionals. You don't even set up the security system. I do, however, think everyone going into the terminals should be screened every time. Just like Kathi Od's school (I am sure she and the other teachers and the principal are professionals too). Screenign everyone is safer AND it sets the right example for John Q Public when the pilots/FAs/ground crews, etc. are held to the same standards (if not higher).

You know, on the 4000 person campus my husband works on the CEO and board members all go through the exact same security screening, drug testing, etc as the 14 year old interns. The family who owns the company (and makes up half of that board) wouldn't have it any other way. Their concern for everyone' safety garners respect--if they though they should be above that (like the pilot in the article--I know you do not think that you just follow the procedures in place) then they would seem suspicious at the worst and at least uncaring and snobby (and yes, it is a pain in the backside to go through security every day to get to work--but if you chose to work in a secured environment it is what it is).

 

[AKL_Megs]

I didn't think so! . Just to all those who think we are gun toting, knife carrying timebombs ready to kill everyone, or pass our weapons on to terrorists at any moment...

Oh, I did not mean to indicate that you or the other FA's are not professionals. You don't even set up the security system. I do, however, think everyone going into the terminals should be screened every time. Just like Kathi Od's school (I am sure she and the other teachers and the principal are professionals too). Screenign everyone is safer AND it sets the right example for John Q Public when the pilots/FAs/ground crews, etc. are held to the same standards (if not higher).

You know, on the 4000 person campus my husband works on the CEO and board members all go through the exact same security screening, drug testing, etc as the 14 year old interns. The family who owns the company (and makes up half of that board) wouldn't have it any other way. Their concern for everyone' safety garners respect--if they though they should be above that (like the pilot in the article--I know you do not think that you just follow the procedures in place) then they would seem suspicious at the worst and at least uncaring and snobby (and yes, it is a pain in the backside to go through security every day to get to work--but if you chose to work in a secured environment it is what it is).

 

[LuvCuteBoys]

I think the body scans and the pat downs are a ridiculous invasion of privacy and I hope that is something is done about it before I decide to fly somewhere.

However, since I doubt it's going away any time soon, I think that it should be an all or nothing thing. That includes the flight crew. If I have to be subjected to it, so should they.

 

[DawnCt1]

I think the body scans and the pat downs are a ridiculous invasion of privacy and I hope that is something is done about it before I decide to fly somewhere.

However, since I doubt it's going away any time soon, I think that it should be an all or nothing thing. That includes the flight crew. If I have to be subjected to it, so should they.

I guess I am naive enough to trust my flight crew. The rest of the flying public? Not so much!

 

[AKL_Megs]

I guess I am naive enough to trust my flight crew. The rest of the flying public? Not so much!

Thank you. You aren't naive. This is smart, especially considering the fact that the second you step on a plane, you are putting your safety (God forbid we have an issue inflight) and life (God forbid you have a life threatening medical issue on board) in OUR HANDS.

You trust us with that, but not with the contents of our suitcases and pockets. It's ridiculous.

We aren't Tom, Dick or Harry from off the street. We spend YEARS waiting for our jobs, MONTHS in training, HOURS in annual recurrent training, we have extensive federal background checks, drug testing... I could go on and on. We can't have so much as a SPEEDING TICKET to get our jobs. Give us a break!