US FAs push back against TSA pat downs

As an aside, I've heard from the ExpressJet pilot that pushed back against the TSA Nude-O-Scopes and gropes that two other pilots have followed his lead, including a US Airbus driver.

Michael Roberts, the ExpressJet pilot that pushed back against the TSA on October 15 2010, had recently mentioned that there have been two other pilots that have followed his lead. A few moments ago on the new site he started to disseminate information, FedUpFlyers.org, the story of the second pilot has be posted. Meet Ann Poe, a 777 pilot based in EWR:

On Thursday November 4th TSA prevented me from taking my commuter flight to EWR to work my BOM (Mumbai) trip. I was detained by TSA for two hours. I have an artificial hip.

I had the choice of either going through the body scanner and subjecting myself to radiation and violation of HIPPA laws (medical privacy laws) or being sexually molested. I have adjusted as much as I could since my pelvic area was violated by TSA in April 2010. That event affected my job performance, personal life and health for months.


(click through for the rest)
 
It is interesting to me that as much as the body scanners and body contour carressings have been decried as invasive, dangerous, degrading, silly, un-American, unprofessional and stupid, no one's yet come around calling them unnecessary or unjustified, probably because of the fact that actual terrorists were and are trying to exploit what was the rather limited use of these screening methods.

On the other hand, what would the public reaction be if the TSA said simply, "we will not be employing these advanced screening methods on the grounds that they are invasive and inconvenient"? This would then beg the question of why even have the TSA or any screening at all if they announce and intend to be not thorough in searching for carefully concealed non-metallic explosives. Who will want to fly then? How greatly will the feeling of well being created by not being harassed and inconvenienced by the TSA be curtailed when you're six miles in the air and realize that any of the passengers' nether crevices might explode at any moment turning you into an instantaneous crispy-fried single-use skydiver?

It doesn't matter what party has the White House or DOT/DHS/FAA because the reality remains regardless that 1.) there exist entities and individuals willing to kill themselves to bring down commercial airliners and 2.) our government is commissioned, paid, and expected to keep this from happening. Even if the TSA were to be scrapped and screening again privatized nothing will change except the guy groping your buns (have you been doing pilates?) will be wearing a different uniform and making a lower hourly wage. In this regard, the heads of the DHS/TSA are stuck with two alternatives: be hated, reviled, or slandered by the flying public for keeping them safe, or be crucified when Al-Qaeda executes a successful attack (for the glory of their peace-loving god). The bottom line here is that the public will never be fully satisfied (either they are not safe enough or their rights are being attacked) and the folks running the show will never be doing a satisfactory enough job because of its no-win nature.

The only real consolation is that however bloated, thick, incomprehensible, backwards, confused, arbitrary, and unpleasant the TSA can be, the fact remains that there has not, under either presidency post-9/11, been a successful attack on a US airliner, though there have been some close calls.

Given the reality of the threats and the amount of money the TSA has already spent on training and equipment I don't think it's likely that these aggressive screening methods will be going away any time soon. Though I do agree with others that advocate a kind of secure-flier prescreen program/database that would allow certain individuals to enjoy a faster, reduced screening, especially pilots and FA's. Such a system could also benefit the Air Force officer I saw enduring his humiliation the other day; vetted frequent fliers, other employees, military, LEO's etc. This would indeed be more convenient for those involved but it would come at the cost of the federal government having one more profile on you including a personalized threat assessment and record of when and where you fly, and that's assuming that the TSA could manage such a system and all that data effectively while keeping costs reasonable, and that's a tall order.

Partisan politics and lofty ideological quipping are convolutions and distractions of little worth beyond expressing self-righteous frustrations about government and the state of the world; the real threat here is not some totalitarian socialist conspiracy or Glenn Beck Kool-Aid Klub minutemen insurrection but that real discussion about issues of grave importance and dialog for generating working solutions are being abrogated by the ignorant tirades of angry morons with nothing to say insisting they be heard.

Ideals aren't very good at detecting explosives. Anybody have a better solution that would allow the TSA to detect carefully hidden non-metallic explosives without body imaging or close physical inspection?

Anybody?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
It is interesting to me that as much as the body scanners and body contour carressings have been decried as invasive, dangerous, degrading, silly, un-American, unprofessional and stupid, no one's yet come around calling them unnecessary or unjustified, probably because of the fact that actual terrorists were and are trying to exploit what was the rather limited use of these screening methods.

On the other hand, what would the public reaction be if the TSA said simply, "we will not be employing these advanced screening methods on the grounds that they are invasive and inconvenient"? This would then beg the question of why even have the TSA or any screening at all if they announce and intend to be not thorough in searching for carefully concealed non-metallic explosives. Who will want to fly then? How greatly will the feeling of well being created by not being harassed and inconvenienced by the TSA be curtailed when you're six miles in the air and realize that any of the passengers' nether crevices might explode at any moment turning you into an instantaneous crispy-fried single-use skydiver?

It doesn't matter what party has the White House or DOT/DHS/FAA because the reality remains regardless that 1.) there exist entities and individuals willing to kill themselves to bring down commercial airliners and 2.) our government is commissioned, paid, and expected to keep this from happening. Even if the TSA were to be scrapped and screening again privatized nothing will change except the guy groping your buns (have you been doing pilates?) will be wearing a different uniform and making a lower hourly wage. In this regard, the heads of the DHS/TSA are stuck with two alternatives: be hated, reviled, or slandered by the flying public for keeping them safe, or be crucified when Al-Qaeda executes a successful attack (for the glory of their peace-loving god). The bottom line here is that the public will never be fully satisfied (either they are not safe enough or their rights are being attacked) and the folks running the show will never be doing a satisfactory enough job because of its no-win nature.

The only real consolation is that however bloated, thick, incomprehensible, backwards, confused, arbitrary, and unpleasant the TSA can be, the fact remains that there has not, under either presidency post-9/11, been a successful attack on a US airliner, though there have been some close calls.

Given the reality of the threats and the amount of money the TSA has already spent on training and equipment I don't think it's likely that these aggressive screening methods will be going away any time soon. Though I do agree with others that advocate a kind of secure-flier prescreen program/database that would allow certain individuals to enjoy a faster, reduced screening, especially pilots and FA's. Such a system could also benefit the Air Force officer I saw enduring his humiliation the other day; vetted frequent fliers, other employees, military, LEO's etc. This would indeed be more convenient for those involved but it would come at the cost of the federal government having one more profile on you including a personalized threat assessment and record of when and where you fly, and that's assuming that the TSA could manage such a system and all that data effectively while keeping costs reasonable, and that's a tall order.

Partisan politics and lofty ideological quipping are convolutions and distractions of little worth beyond expressing self-righteous frustrations about government and the state of the world; the real threat here is not some totalitarian socialist conspiracy or Glenn Beck Kool-Aid Klub minutemen insurrection but that real discussion about issues of grave importance and dialog for generating working solutions are being abrogated by the ignorant tirades of angry morons with nothing to say insisting they be heard.

Ideals aren't very good at detecting explosives. Anybody have a better solution that would allow the TSA to detect carefully hidden non-metallic explosives without body imaging or close physical inspection?

Anybody?


Yeah, contract with EL AL to do the screening. They employ retired Mossad, Police Detectives, and experts in behavioral profiling. The screening process is both seen and unseen and begins upon airport arrival. In the screening process if determined that a person is non-threat, i.e crew member, top tier frequent flier who had verified business, etc., no further resources is used. However if a traveler raises flags, the screening process never ends and much of it unseen. Of course you need better than the average rent a cop raised to federal worker status with a government badge.
 
It is interesting to me that as much as the body scanners and body contour carressings have been decried as invasive, dangerous, degrading, silly, un-American, unprofessional and stupid, no one's yet come around calling them unnecessary or unjustified, probably because of the fact that actual terrorists were and are trying to exploit what was the rather limited use of these screening methods.

On the other hand, what would the public reaction be if the TSA said simply, "we will not be employing these advanced screening methods on the grounds that they are invasive and inconvenient"? This would then beg the question of why even have the TSA or any screening at all if they announce and intend to be not thorough in searching for carefully concealed non-metallic explosives. Who will want to fly then? How greatly will the feeling of well being created by not being harassed and inconvenienced by the TSA be curtailed when you're six miles in the air and realize that any of the passengers' nether crevices might explode at any moment turning you into an instantaneous crispy-fried single-use skydiver?

It doesn't matter what party has the White House or DOT/DHS/FAA because the reality remains regardless that 1.) there exist entities and individuals willing to kill themselves to bring down commercial airliners and 2.) our government is commissioned, paid, and expected to keep this from happening. Even if the TSA were to be scrapped and screening again privatized nothing will change except the guy groping your buns (have you been doing pilates?) will be wearing a different uniform and making a lower hourly wage. In this regard, the heads of the DHS/TSA are stuck with two alternatives: be hated, reviled, or slandered by the flying public for keeping them safe, or be crucified when Al-Qaeda executes a successful attack (for the glory of their peace-loving god). The bottom line here is that the public will never be fully satisfied (either they are not safe enough or their rights are being attacked) and the folks running the show will never be doing a satisfactory enough job because of its no-win nature.

The only real consolation is that however bloated, thick, incomprehensible, backwards, confused, arbitrary, and unpleasant the TSA can be, the fact remains that there has not, under either presidency post-9/11, been a successful attack on a US airliner, though there have been some close calls.

Given the reality of the threats and the amount of money the TSA has already spent on training and equipment I don't think it's likely that these aggressive screening methods will be going away any time soon. Though I do agree with others that advocate a kind of secure-flier prescreen program/database that would allow certain individuals to enjoy a faster, reduced screening, especially pilots and FA's. Such a system could also benefit the Air Force officer I saw enduring his humiliation the other day; vetted frequent fliers, other employees, military, LEO's etc. This would indeed be more convenient for those involved but it would come at the cost of the federal government having one more profile on you including a personalized threat assessment and record of when and where you fly, and that's assuming that the TSA could manage such a system and all that data effectively while keeping costs reasonable, and that's a tall order.

Partisan politics and lofty ideological quipping are convolutions and distractions of little worth beyond expressing self-righteous frustrations about government and the state of the world; the real threat here is not some totalitarian socialist conspiracy or Glenn Beck Kool-Aid Klub minutemen insurrection but that real discussion about issues of grave importance and dialog for generating working solutions are being abrogated by the ignorant tirades of angry morons with nothing to say insisting they be heard.

Ideals aren't very good at detecting explosives. Anybody have a better solution that would allow the TSA to detect carefully hidden non-metallic explosives without body imaging or close physical inspection?

Anybody?
Yes, many better ideas.
The "puffer" machines that were deployed nationwide, but then cancelled, will find non metallic explosives, and would most likely would have discovered the underware bomb and shoe bomb attempts. Bomb sniffing dogs roaming the airports or more specifically, marching down the security line at the metal detector will find non-metallic explosives. The radio or microwave scanners would highlight the explosives without ionizing radiation and without an explicit picture being taken of the passenger.
These measures are actually more effective at finding explosives, than a backscatter scanner, but it seems this effective multipurpose tool will be the machine of choice based on cost, and speed without balancing the obvious downsides to the people subjected to its use.
So to answer your question, have a multi layered approach where explosives dogs are patrolling the security checkpoint, pass through the metal dectector, pass through the puffer machine, anything out of the ordinary goes to the microwave scanner and/or a more thorough look by TSA. It would be every bit as effective as the backscatter, uses already existing technology, and wouldnt be nearly as intrusive and controversial as this new radiate or rubdown procedure.
 
Ideals aren't very good at detecting explosives. Anybody have a better solution that would allow the TSA to detect carefully hidden non-metallic explosives without body imaging or close physical inspection?

Anybody?

Hiya ChuckJockey,

With all due respect, in response to your query. I can't see that the topic of screening passengers and the screening of flight crew are the same issue. Without going into any detail, suffice it to say that there are protocols in place that allow certain flight crew members to circumvent security protocols at certain airports if a procedure is pre-approved by the TSA and the particular airline has completed what is deemed necessary to be done.
The question is why are we flight crew members still subjected to this dog and pony show? I have my opinionated answer, I'm sure that the TSA and my company have a differing one. It all comes down to whom is inconvenienced and $$. I'm going out on a limb here, but if Mr. Parker was subject to the harassment that we incur every day that we arrive for work and something could be done to alleviate his harassment, it would be done.
 
Hiya ChuckJockey,
Hi Herotic.

With all due respect, in response to your query. I can't see that the topic of screening passengers and the screening of flight crew are the same issue.
Which is great if you find the screening merely humiliating and unnecessary for you only by virtue of your position; this implies you don't have a problem with them in principle or practice. I was addressing those who do oppose the use of these techniques in principle and practice. OP's article refers specifically to the newly-implemented screening techniques and not security screening for pilots and FA's in general.

The question is why are we flight crew members still subjected to this dog and pony show? I have my opinionated answer, I'm sure that the TSA and my company have a differing one. It all comes down to whom is inconvenienced and $$. I'm going out on a limb here, but if Mr. Parker was subject to the harassment that we incur every day that we arrive for work and something could be done to alleviate his harassment, it would be done.

I can think of two major reasons:

1. TSA doesn't want to take any chances. Omitting how many thousands of in-flight employees from security screening means creating a vulnerability that, however unlikely, can still be exploited. Crazy things have happened: a gun can go off in the cockpit, an FA can snap and steal beers and deploy a slide, an FA could try to smuggle cocaine in her uniform, a crew member might have too recently left the hotel bar. As far as the TSA is concerned, flight crews are still people, and people can be unpredictable.

2. The general flying, tax-paying public would probably not respond very favorably to the question: "Should uniformed airline pilots and flight attendants be exempted from TSA checkpoint screenings?" or even to the question: "Should uniformed airline pilots and flight attendants be exempted from more invasive screening techniques such as body imaging and body contour pat downs?" That is to say, they would rather hear the crying of airline employees who they don't have to answer to than the angry yells of the flying public that would consider granting across-the-board flight crew exemptions from screenings to be unsafe and unfair.
 
2. The general flying, tax-paying public would probably not respond very favorably to the question: "Should uniformed airline pilots and flight attendants be exempted from TSA checkpoint screenings?"

The fact is, they already are. The rules are in place (and in use at a few airports) for screening bypass for flight crews, but the financial burden to accomplish this has to be borne by the airlines who are too cheap to set it up. As the flight attendants and pilots "push" back at the TSA, this may change when the companies realize it may be in their best interest to provide the TSA-approved crew bypass.

However, I feel that the AIT and physical grope are inappropriate for passengers, too. But they need to do their own "pushing" in whatever manner they can. Their best bet is money. Maybe sitting out a major holiday at home, en masse, will get some attention. If the TSA is hellbent on destroying the airline industry, and the airlines are willing to let it happen, then so be it.
 
I can think of two major reasons:

1. TSA doesn't want to take any chances. Omitting how many thousands of in-flight employees from security screening means creating a vulnerability that, however unlikely, can still be exploited. Crazy things have happened: a gun can go off in the cockpit, an FA can snap and steal beers and deploy a slide, an FA could try to smuggle cocaine in her uniform, a crew member might have too recently left the hotel bar. As far as the TSA is concerned, flight crews are still people, and people can be unpredictable.

2. The general flying, tax-paying public would probably not respond very favorably to the question: "Should uniformed airline pilots and flight attendants be exempted from TSA checkpoint screenings?" or even to the question: "Should uniformed airline pilots and flight attendants be exempted from more invasive screening techniques such as body imaging and body contour pat downs?" That is to say, they would rather hear the crying of airline employees who they don't have to answer to than the angry yells of the flying public that would consider granting across-the-board flight crew exemptions from screenings to be unsafe and unfair.

Sorry for the misspelling of your sign in name.

Regarding number 1's examples, how exactly does screening prevent any of the above except smuggling? While you appear to accuse me of having a superiority complex simply by way of the fact that I wear a uniform; may I pose that you certainly appear to have the same regarding us basic folk.
Just calling it like I see it. For what it's worth I'm not going into anymore detail on this matter as it a sensitive security issue.
 
X-ray Body Scanner or pat-down? The choice is yours, and the pat-downs can get intrusive. The ACLU has been fighting the machines years before they were used. I don't think they can do anything about pat-downs. Putting crews through the TSA methods of ticking everybody off has been going on since the TSA first arrived.

Welcome to the world of the TSA where it might be better to just go through the body scanner and get it over with.
 
The fact is, they already are. The rules are in place (and in use at a few airports) for screening bypass for flight crews, but the financial burden to accomplish this has to be borne by the airlines who are too cheap to set it up. As the flight attendants and pilots "push" back at the TSA, this may change when the companies realize it may be in their best interest to provide the TSA-approved crew bypass.

However, I feel that the AIT and physical grope are inappropriate for passengers, too. But they need to do their own "pushing" in whatever manner they can. Their best bet is money. Maybe sitting out a major holiday at home, en masse, will get some attention. If the TSA is hellbent on destroying the airline industry, and the airlines are willing to let it happen, then so be it.

Right on my friend. And everyone needs to opt out EVERY time. The We. before Thanksgiving is the official day & it's going strong.
www.optoutday.com
 
It is interesting to me that as much as the body scanners and body contour carressings have been decried as invasive, dangerous, degrading, silly, un-American, unprofessional and stupid, no one's yet come around calling them unnecessary or unjustified, probably because of the fact that actual terrorists were and are trying to exploit what was the rather limited use of these screening methods....

It doesn't matter what party has the White House or DOT/DHS/FAA because the reality remains regardless that 1.) there exist entities and individuals willing to kill themselves to bring down commercial airliners and 2.) our government is commissioned, paid, and expected to keep this from happening. Even if the TSA were to be scrapped and screening again privatized nothing will change except the guy groping your buns (have you been doing pilates?) will be wearing a different uniform and making a lower hourly wage. In this regard, the heads of the DHS/TSA are stuck with two alternatives: be hated, reviled, or slandered by the flying public for keeping them safe, or be crucified when Al-Qaeda executes a successful attack (for the glory of their peace-loving god). The bottom line here is that the public will never be fully satisfied (either they are not safe enough or their rights are being attacked) and the folks running the show will never be doing a satisfactory enough job because of its no-win nature.

The only real consolation is that however bloated, thick, incomprehensible, backwards, confused, arbitrary, and unpleasant the TSA can be, the fact remains that there has not, under either presidency post-9/11, been a successful attack on a US airliner, though there have been some close calls...

Ideals aren't very good at detecting explosives. Anybody have a better solution that would allow the TSA to detect carefully hidden non-metallic explosives without body imaging or close physical inspection?

Anybody?

First of all, just to clarify, the would-be attacks on aircraft had foreign origins. After 9/11, I read an article that basically said that the government was working on rendering explosive substances, such as fertilizers, non-explosive. This may explain why attempts within the US(like Times Square) failed. When the explosive powder was found in ink cartridges it came from foreign soil as did the crotch bomber. This shows desperation on the part of the terrorist network and also proves that TSA should concentrate more on what's coming into this country rather than what is already here!

The TSA needs to be held accountable and this is where it is beyond the law. If crews need to be inspected because they suspect there is a danger to the passengers, then they need to make some arrests on whatever allegations they are looking for. Otherwise it is a waste of taxpayer time and money, and is also detrimental to the economy because it makes people not want to fly at all!

There is a silver lining to this whole thing if people think about it. Using a body scanner may decimate the Thousands Standing Around brigade! :lol:
 
The whole point of this TSA nonsense is to keep terrorists off the planes, and I'm sorry to say that if the terrorists get as far as the airport, then the system has already failed miserably. If our government were doing its job, this should not even be an issue at the point of entering airport security. The terrorists need to be caught before they purchase an airline ticket. Wasn't that the whole point of Secure Flight?

The government and the airlines can implement behind-the-scenes procedures to stop these terrorists from being able to purchase airline tickets. Virtual strip searches and legalized sexual assault are not the way to keep terrorists from blowing up planes.

We need to block the terrorists, not look for explosives hidden in body cavities at the airport. The TSA is terrorizing every single person who seeks entry into the airport security area, and this is just plan disgusting. They are going about it backwards, and we are all suffering as a result. This will never end. It will only get worse.

I'm all for safety and security, but body scanners and invasive physical pat-downs do not make me feel safe.
 
Ahhh more insight to the wonderful Patdowns. Seems as though they aren't just for those that choose to OPT out. It's for any alarm. As time goes on and everyone is made aware or gone through this process, the whiplash is going to get bigger and bigger. Was in conversation with a f/a today that wasn't aware of new procedures (went through airport w/o back scatter) set alarm off, couldn't resolve it I guess. Gets patted down, Hand up skirt, and as hand felt resisitance, it proceded to search back and forth 3 times. In the f/a's words, the screeners finger was extended to probe (not insert) to ensure NOTHING was hidden front or back..... As she stated. It will not occur again...
 
While I agree with most of your post, be advised that the goon squad called the TSA is a product of the Bush administration, and has consistently since its inception moved ever onward toward more and more intrusive, arrogant, ignorant, and useless abuses of the traveling public. Don't blame Obama. It's just the TSA marching on.
That should be Tub Stackers of America, Thanks driver for setting that up for me.
 
Honestly people,
I don't care if your perspective is left/right/up/down, this trancends our politics. We readers of this board are well aware of the realities of flying and security screening. If not here, then where should I go to unify and make a stand? If you have an answer PM me!