Airlining to and from work

[Kelly]

AZ,
I airlined out of MCO yesterday with no problems.

 

[HSDriver]

121/135 does matter...

well said, When I traveled on day 1 and spoke with the TSA supervisor, he gave me a copy of the TSA directive which clearly states that any crew member in uniform is exempt, no wording of 121,135,or 91 for that matter, and yes I was allowed to carry my ice cold soft drink and lunch on board

Do whatever you want. As for me. My badge says NBAA on the back, nothing about the FAA, TSA, any specific airport, etc. I don't work for the airlines and have nothing to do with any airline terminal I fly from and so I don't understand how I could consider myself a crew member.

A recent email from my director of safety regarding travel...

"All,

We have received clarification from the TSA regarding the exemption to the latest security measures (no liquids) for flightcrew members. This exemption applies ONLY to flightcrew of Part 121 air carriers (those with a Full Security Program, not Twelve-five Program flightcrew). Even if you are allowed the courtesy to access the crew line for security screening when traveling through a commercial airport, you should NOT attempt to carry any of the recently-banned items in your carry-on bag. If you are stopped, either at the initial screening point or at a secondary gate screening point, and admit to knowingly violating the new security procedures, you could be liable to enforcement action.

With this new information, we reiterate our original recommendation to check your bag containing these items when airlining to/from duty. An alternative might be to place these items in a separate, small bag and check only that bag, to avoid the possibility of lost clothes or other personal items. If you choose to carry your bags, you should remove all banned items before passing through security screening."


HS

 

[greygoose]

If you are stopped, either at the initial screening point or at a secondary gate screening point, and admit to knowingly violating the new security procedures, you could be liable to enforcement action.

All I hear is "i'm a pilot" this and "i'm a pilot" that, you are also a paying customer just like everyone else. I would rather check my bags, then to have them allow any crewmember through security with checked bags. First why risk being violated, it would be quite hard to argue in court against the TSA. Second, in time you will see terrorist buying pilot uniforms, making fake id's,making it through security and taking down more airplanes. I thank God that hasnt happend.

 

[EdAtTheAirport]

Hey AZ: Sorry if I didn't make it clearer that that UPS pilot story was on the "majors" board, which I copy/pasted. It wasn't me. I was just pointing out that some TSA personnel are so ignorant that even UPS isn't considered a commercial airline. Imagine.

As for carry-ons, one of the biggest problems, especially if you pack electronic gear is theft. I worked as a baggage thrower many years ago. I'll never forget the brazenness of those who just opened people's bags and took out whatever items they wanted.

I lost a radar detector on an airline years back (the only thing missing from my bag). Despite submitting all the paperwork, they just denied responsibility. Now that we have TSA inspections, you'll never pin down responsibility for your stolen items. Don't be ignorant; the baggage handlers steal!

 

[batsky2000]

Do whatever you want. As for me. My badge says NBAA on the back, nothing about the FAA, TSA, any specific airport, etc. I don't work for the airlines and have nothing to do with any airline terminal I fly from and so I don't understand how I could consider myself a crew member.

A recent email from my director of safety regarding travel...

"All,

We have received clarification from the TSA regarding the exemption to the latest security measures (no liquids) for flightcrew members. This exemption applies ONLY to flightcrew of Part 121 air carriers (those with a Full Security Program, not Twelve-five Program flightcrew). Even if you are allowed the courtesy to access the crew line for security screening when traveling through a commercial airport, you should NOT attempt to carry any of the recently-banned items in your carry-on bag. If you are stopped, either at the initial screening point or at a secondary gate screening point, and admit to knowingly violating the new security procedures, you could be liable to enforcement action.

With this new information, we reiterate our original recommendation to check your bag containing these items when airlining to/from duty. An alternative might be to place these items in a separate, small bag and check only that bag, to avoid the possibility of lost clothes or other personal items. If you choose to carry your bags, you should remove all banned items before passing through security screening."


HS

Well you can do what ever you want!!All my badge says is AIRCREW in big letters on the front and nothing on the back, in fact the last airline that I worked for, that badge did not say FAA or the airport name either, so your point is mute. I refuse to have to check my bag, since I have never had to in the past except right after 9/11, and when I did that 1 time, it was rolled over by a baggage cart, it took a year and lots of phone calls to get Delta to pay for the damage, so if the TSA tells me that I can take what I take now on board as long as I am in Uniform, and the Directive that I have in my hands states nothing about 121 air carriers then I will continue to travel through the crew lines and carry what I have been before this mumbo jumbo, I have no idea where you work or where your company got its info from but I have a copy of the directive in front of me and like some others, I have had no problem airlining as usual, my company,NJ has stated just the opposite of yours, if wearing a uniform gets you through security better then wear it, that is what they told us to do. But if you want to be a goody good boy, then follow what you have been told, your company management are not the ones that have to commute and deal with all of the crap that we do, so I will do what ever makes my life and week easier.

 

[NJA bound]

batsky2000, any chance you could forward a copy of that TSA directive my way?



Thanks

 

[Flyingdutchman]

batsky -

Thanks for your pm brother. Please do me and NJA bound a big favor and try to send us a copy.

FD

 

[HSDriver]

Well you can do what ever you want!!All my badge says is AIRCREW in big letters on the front and nothing on the back, in fact the last airline that I worked for, that badge did not say FAA or the airport name either, so your point is mute. I refuse to have to check my bag, since I have never had to in the past except right after 9/11, and when I did that 1 time, it was rolled over by a baggage cart, it took a year and lots of phone calls to get Delta to pay for the damage, so if the TSA tells me that I can take what I take now on board as long as I am in Uniform, and the Directive that I have in my hands states nothing about 121 air carriers then I will continue to travel through the crew lines and carry what I have been before this mumbo jumbo, I have no idea where you work or where your company got its info from but I have a copy of the directive in front of me and like some others, I have had no problem airlining as usual, my company,NJ has stated just the opposite of yours, if wearing a uniform gets you through security better then wear it, that is what they told us to do. But if you want to be a goody good boy, then follow what you have been told, your company management are not the ones that have to commute and deal with all of the crap that we do, so I will do what ever makes my life and week easier.

My point is mute? I would bet that your badge said the name of the airline that you worked for on it didn't it?

You refuse to have to check your bag? LOL

Since I never had to until right after 9/11? HA ha... News flash!

So, let me get this straight. Anybody with a badge that says aircrew and a uniform can carry on the prohibited items? Boy are we in trouble.

I hope, and I think it is a possibility, that in the not too distant future there will be NO carry on's allowed at all and it would just be fine with me. Think how fast the boarding process and getting thru security would be would be:0)

Regards,

HS

 

[popgoesbubble]

I was told by TSA that ONLY 121 Pilots can Carry there stuff On thats It! Why Not make TSA job alot easier and put the ego aside and check your bags so they can look for the real bad people. They get fatiged just like use looking at x-ray video all day. I have no problem checking my bag cuz if it gets lost or left behind we all get a day off!

 

[Dep676]

Because some of us have to carry a laptop. Like I want some 2 dollar help looking through my bag when I am not around then stealing whatever they want.

Have you seen the way they handle the checked baggage?

 

[batsky2000]

My point is mute? I would bet that your badge said the name of the airline that you worked for on it didn't it?

You refuse to have to check your bag? LOL

Since I never had to until right after 9/11? HA ha... News flash!

So, let me get this straight. Anybody with a badge that says aircrew and a uniform can carry on the prohibited items? Boy are we in trouble.

I hope, and I think it is a possibility, that in the not too distant future there will be NO carry on's allowed at all and it would just be fine with me. Think how fast the boarding process and getting thru security would be would be:0)

Regards,

HS

Your point is still mute, yea, my badge did say the name of the airline on it, just as it does now, insted it says Netjets now, so what is your point, your company is so cheap that they won't put their name on your crew badges?

And yes I still refuse to check my bag, when they decide that it is illegal to search through someones personal property with out them being there, then maybe I would be willing to check a bag, but that will never happen, the bush admin. has decided that the constitution is not worth the paper it was written on, so we do not have any rights any more. And I have no desire to have to wait 40-50 min. for my bag to come through on the belt.

One point that you have missed about the frac world is that if you check your bag as you want to do, there is always the chance that once you arive at your HUB or connectiong airport that you might get a brief to a new destination, but guess what, those bags that you just checked are on their way to the other side of the country, good luck catching up with them, have seen this happen many times with crews that check their bags

I have no problem making it quick through security, don't know why it takes you soo long? Good luck in thinking that they will ban all carry on's, not in my life time, if that happens, the demand for air travel will hit rock bottom, most people would rather drive than have to deal with all of the hassles at that point

And for the guys that want a copy of the TSA directive, I don't have a scanner, you will have to get one like I did, go to your local airport, ask to see the TSA supervisor on duty, and ask them for a copy to carry with you.

 

[EdAtTheAirport]

A few points for you, Batsky:

You give your consent for them to search your bag when you fly. Nothing in the Constitution prevents that. No different from the "implied consent" at a DUI checkpoint.

Furthermore, would you really want there to be no checks on checked baggage? If you were President would you eliminate all of the checks?

I believe I heard that the Brits have banned checked baggage. (Someone might back me up on that.) Rock bottom? Maybe a lull, but not a bust. The flying public would suck it up and comply like they've already done.

 

[HSDriver]

Your point is still mute, yea, my badge did say the name of the airline on it, just as it does now, insted it says Netjets now, so what is your point, your company is so cheap that they won't put their name on your crew badges?

And yes I still refuse to check my bag, when they decide that it is illegal to search through someones personal property with out them being there, then maybe I would be willing to check a bag, but that will never happen, the bush admin. has decided that the constitution is not worth the paper it was written on, so we do not have any rights any more. And I have no desire to have to wait 40-50 min. for my bag to come through on the belt.

One point that you have missed about the frac world is that if you check your bag as you want to do, there is always the chance that once you arive at your HUB or connectiong airport that you might get a brief to a new destination, but guess what, those bags that you just checked are on their way to the other side of the country, good luck catching up with them, have seen this happen many times with crews that check their bags

I have no problem making it quick through security, don't know why it takes you soo long? Good luck in thinking that they will ban all carry on's, not in my life time, if that happens, the demand for air travel will hit rock bottom, most people would rather drive than have to deal with all of the hassles at that point

And for the guys that want a copy of the TSA directive, I don't have a scanner, you will have to get one like I did, go to your local airport, ask to see the TSA supervisor on duty, and ask them for a copy to carry with you.

Thanks for making my point about the badge. And yes, my company does put the name on the badge and guess what? It is not an airline. So, I am not an airline crew member. Which terminal does Net Jets operate out of? I suspect it is the General Aviation terminal.

I didn't miss any point about the fracs. Do you think you are the only traveler that needs their baggage when they get to their destination and that may have to go somewhere else in a hurry?

When did I say it takes me "sooo long" to get thru security? I just said it would be quicker. I believe if you read my previous posts in other threads here you will find out that I never have any problem getting thru security and also never wear my uniform(because I am not an airline crewmember).

Ok, I'm done here. Good luck.

HS

 

[Ultra Grump]

I'm going to continue to carry my bag, liquids and all, onto the aicraft til someone tells me I can't. Hasn't happened yet.

Regarding the point that anyone could buy a pilot's uniform and make a fake badge - yes, that's true. How would it be any more difficult to copy a 121 carrier's than a 135 carrier's uniform/badge? So subjecting frac pilots to different rules than 121 helps how, exactly?

 

[Flyingdutchman]

Im wondering the same thing here....

 

[b757driver]

TSA Tsusk

Part 121, 135, 90 or whatever.
Do you even think the TSA know the difference, can tell you apart or even care?

 

[b757driver]

Hey AZ: Sorry if I didn't make it clearer that that UPS pilot story was on the "majors" board, which I copy/pasted. It wasn't me. I was just pointing out that some TSA personnel are so ignorant that even UPS isn't considered a commercial airline. Imagine.

As for carry-ons, one of the biggest problems, especially if you pack electronic gear is theft. I worked as a baggage thrower many years ago. I'll never forget the brazenness of those who just opened people's bags and took out whatever items they wanted.

I lost a radar detector on an airline years back (the only thing missing from my bag). Despite submitting all the paperwork, they just denied responsibility. Now that we have TSA inspections, you'll never pin down responsibility for your stolen items. Don't be ignorant; the baggage handlers steal!

None of this is NEW!
We all know that the TSA is a govt bureacracy and as such, reacts to news rather than acts in a rational fashion swinging from one side of the pendulum to the other. They are NOT taught to think or exercise discretion. They act according to what they are told! one thing IS for sure, and that is there is NO standardization!
And yes, I have had items stolen from CHECKED baggage while commercialing to duty. Was clearly my fault as I had a TSA-approved lock and that also was stolen!!
Here's a report on our illustrious TSA which holds NO surprises.

By JOHN TIERNEY
Published: August 15, 2006
Three years ago, officials at Dulles Airport conducted a little experiment to improve security on international flights. They wanted most passengers to spend less time in line at checkpoints.
Skip to next paragraph

Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times
John Tierney.

For Further Reading

• "Time to Rethink Airport Security," by Robert W. Poole, Jr., and James Jay Carafano, Ph.D. July 26, 2006.
  
• "Airport Security: Time for a New Model," by Robert W. Poole, Jr. January 2006. [PDF]
  
• "Liquid Threat Is Hard to Detect," by Matthew L. Wald and Eric Lipton. August 11, 2006.

E-Mail John Tierney

Columnist Page



Podcasts

Audio Versions of Op-Ed Columns

TimesSelect subscribers can now listen to a reading of the day's Op-Ed columns.






Today, of course, this idea sounds terribly dangerous. Who can afford to worry about passengers' convenience? Let them wait for hours. Take away those Evians of mass destruction. Last weekend, even reading material became suspect — why would anyone on a six-hour flight need a book anyway? Stop making trouble and watch the movie!
The Dulles experiment was radical even in 2003, when airport screeners thought nothing of making passengers wait while they searched Grandma's purse for nail scissors. But a few experts wondered if there was a better use of everyone's time.
The screeners at Dulles stopped worrying about pen knives, shoes and laptops, allowing passengers to pass through more quickly. The speed of the line increased by nearly a third. The screening process required fewer workers, but they detected more problems because they worked smarter.
Instead of looking for things, they looked at people. Borrowing techniques from Israeli airports and the U.S. Customs Service, screeners observed a passenger as he entered the airport, checked luggage and stood in line at the security checkpoint.
The screeners were looking for unusual behavior like sweating, rigid posture, clenched fists. A screener would engage a passenger in conversation and ask questions he wouldn't have been trained to expect, like whether he'd seen a Redskins game the night before even though the Redskins hadn't played.
The screeners were looking for telltale body language of someone trying too hard to act natural. When they spotted it, they singled out that person for interrogation, a pat-down and a luggage search. The screeners caught no terrorists, but they consistently found people with something to hide, often a forged visa, a stolen airline ticket, drugs or other smuggled goods.
Scott McHugh, who oversaw the Dulles program for the Transportation Security Administration, is confident this type of screening would have flagged the Sept. 11 terrorists or the latest plotters in London. "If you look at the videos of 9/11 terrorists and the interviews with people who talked to them," he says, "they all exhibit symptoms of stress that would have been identified, like failure to make eye contact and failure to answer questions directly. They're not exactly sophisticated. They're under so much stress that anything out of the ordinary really throws them off their game."
McHugh, though, doesn't hold much hope for the current system. He's now in the private security industry after leaving the T.S.A. in frustration at its inertia. Although the agency has been introducing the innovations from the Dulles program to other airports, it still spends most of its time and money looking for things.
"Airport security isn't much better than it was on September 10," McHugh says. "Terrorists will always come up with something new. As long as we keep looking for things from the last plot, we're inconveniencing 99.99 percent of the people with no real benefit."
It's not that the T.S.A.'s leaders don't see the problem. Kip Hawley, who took over the agency last year, is a smart manager who has been trying to change the agency's focus. He removed small scissors from the taboo list, and he has complained about all the time spent by screeners seizing cigarette lighters to comply with an order from Congress.
But he's making little headway because he has inherited an unworkable mess created by Congress after Sept. 11. It ignored the security model in Israel and much of Europe, where screening programs are run by airports under the guidance of a national agency. Instead, Congress ordered the T.S.A. to both supervise and run the screening programs itself.
The result has been a waste of billions of dollars on an unwieldy federal agency that's become known as Thousands Standing Around. The T.S.A. should be trying to anticipate new terrorist tactics, like the bomb plot uncovered in England, but it had to raid its research budget to pay for the screening program, as Eric Lipton and Matt Wald reported in The Times.
It should be looking for new ways to identify dangerous passengers, but it's too busy following Congress's mandates to search everyone's bags. Now screeners have even more stuff to look for as we all stand in line — well, almost all of us. Anyone serious about blowing up an airplane is off somewhere else working on something new.

 

[Dilligaff]

I went through security in uniform yesterday and was allowed to keep my toothpaste.

Dilligaff

 

[Flyingdutchman]

P91 corp. ?

 

[MalteseX]

Part 121, 135, 90 or whatever.
Do you even think the TSA know the difference, can tell you apart or even care?

Heck, I don't even know the difference.

I seriously doubt if the TSA has ever HEARD of the parts.