Enough security checks

At least one pilot in airline Widerøe ( Norwegian airline ) has opted for early retirement rather than continue to endure the security routines at Norwegian airports.

Tom Erik Liverud, head of Widerøe's pilot union confirmed this to newspaper Adresseavisen.

A captain chose to retire early primarily because of what he called "security madness".

"He is happy to be retired and finished with this. This is a marked contrast to some years ago when pilots were sad to give up their dream jobs when they passed 60," Liverud said.

Just a few days ago a Widerøe pilot delayed a departure from Namsos for refusing to take off his shoes in a security check, and reportedly screamed - 'I am no terrorist!'.

This problems is most acute on the short hop networks where pilots and other crew may have to go through security checks up to ten times a day, all year round, even if their exit and re-entry is due to a trip to the toilet or to get a cup of coffee.

"The security demands are all for show and in some situations are counterproductive. All a pilot needs to crash a plane is his hands. It feels meaningless to use so many millions of crowns without even carrying out a risk analysis," Liverud said.

The Norwegian Airline Pilots Association believes that flight crews should have separate arrangements, like customs officers and police, who are allowed to freely pass through airport security checks when on duty.


http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article2063130.ece

Yes its indeed correct . I guess if a pilot wants to crash a plane he can and doesnt need to take anything else on board with him!!! There should be special express channels for pilots and they still need to be scanned but taking off shoes etc... is a bit much. They are security checked for ID anyway so the risk is alot less.

Quoting OA260 (Reply 1): There should be special express channels for pilots

I thought they did. They have their own customs line, at least at YYZ.


AF340

[quote=AF340,reply=2]I thought they did. They have their own customs line, at least at YYZ.[quote=AF340,reply=2]

I've seen it at IAH as well.

[Edited 2007-10-23 15:57:44]

It's a shame he has made that decision.
There should be a 'secure ID' program for all cockpit and cabin flight crew in most countries for entry and exit to/from flights. In Norway, you have a national ID card that when read could give the secure status, no need for removing shoes, and other nonsense, although bags would still need to go through X-rays outbound and customs if needed inbound on international non EC routes. For the USA, they have proposed this for frequent flyers and could be easily copied over to cockpit and cabin crews too, as well as having all but the smallest airports have separate express lanes for outbound security for flight crews and airport employees.

Quoting CJAContinental (Reply 3): [quote=AF340,reply=2]I thought they did. They have their own customs line, at least at YYZ.[/quote=AF340,reply=2] I've seen it at IAH as well.

At large airports that's quite usual, however Widerøe operate to many small regional airports in Norway and Scandinavia where there is often only one customs line for the entire terminal. I can understand the frustration, if he was approaching retirement and free to go at any time, the extra irritating measures would have just tipped his decision.


Dan 

Maybe we are better off to be rid of pilots with such short fuses that they scream at security personnel or retire early because they can't deal with the stresses of their jobs? Maybe these pilots would not be the best ones to have in command during an emergency. Just a thought...

Namsos Airport in northern Norway is a very small place served by Widerøe with a Dash-8-100 twice a day from Trondheim, morning and late afternoon.

In 2005 the airport served 18,838 passengers, that's 51.6 passengers per day in average. FIFTY-ONE PASSENGERS !!!

There is no need for a fast security lane, but there is a terrible lack of common sense.

This is only one of several cases in Norway lately, concerning this issue. Several pilots have voiced their opinions on this issue and how they feel criminalized, being searched several times a day at various airports in Norway.

What if the pilot is commuting in his uniform to his flight? Then he does not have the power to crash the plane and should probably be subject to the same requirements as other passengers since he is riding in back.

I feel for the pilot. Bottom line is flight crews can kill everyone on board withouth weapons or shoe bombs. I agree that all flight crew (Not so much cabin crew) should be allowed into the aircraft without or with little screening. As mentioned above, just like cops and security staff are. In fact, a cop or security staff member would be more likely to bring a weapon on to an aircraft that a pilot, as it is pointless for a pilot seeing as his hands can be deadly if decided upon

Quoting AirTranTUS (Reply 9): What if the pilot is commuting in his uniform to his flight? Then he does not have the power to crash the plane and should probably be subject to the same requirements as other passengers since he is riding in back.

Very good point, the crew lanes should require paperwork stating that he is working on the flight.

AF340

Quoting AF340 (Reply 11): Very good point, the crew lanes should require paperwork stating that he is working on the flight.

Or just a digital confirmation. Scan your fingerprint, match it to the flight, move along?

That technology will work, but likely costs money so it's not quite there yet.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 12):

I'm sure they can incorporate something into the airport ID. A magnetic chip or something... That might be cheaper

And BTW,

For all you pilots who feel "victimized" you need a reality check.

I have a good friend who's a VP at a major investment bank in NYC. Every day since 9/11, every single day, he must go through beefed up security to get into the building, which includes metal detectors and searching his bags and such. No shoe removal, but that's about the only difference than the airport.

And he's a million dollar employee who knows all the security people by name! It's a procedure, it's stupid, but it's just the way it is. Not one executive at that company has ever blown up a building or shot anyone at work, but they still treat them all "like criminals" (and not the white collar kind...   )

But he's not going to quit over it or start yelling at people.

Here at the movie studios in Los Angeles, cars are routinely searched, even executives and famous actors/directors. They check for bombs underneath and look in your trunk. Again, you know most of the security people, and in this case, if they know you, they may not do it every single day, but you'll still be checked routinely. And not one studio has ever been bombed or hijacked...

I really feel that pilots consider themselves a special class of people sometimes, the way they talk about their mistreatment in all facets of their jobs as if the rest of the world is treated better and paid more. Where does this mentality come from?

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14): I have a good friend who's a VP at a major investment bank in NYC. Every day since 9/11, every single day, he must go through beefed up security to get into the building, which includes metal detectors and searching his bags and such. No shoe removal, but that's about the only difference than the airport.

But pilots can do that up to 10 times a day


AF340

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14): And BTW, For all you pilots who feel "victimized" you need a reality check.

Pilots feel victimized because of the lack of common sense in the policies. Why should pilots be forced to go through a security screening, while other employees can use their airport ID to bypass security? (I won't go into details as to who can bypass security as that is somewhat sensitive information).

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 4): In Norway, you have a national ID card

No, we don't.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14): For all you pilots who feel "victimized" you need a reality check. I have a good friend who's a VP at a major investment bank in NYC. Every day since 9/11, every single day, he must go through beefed up security to get into the building, which includes metal detectors and searching his bags and such. No shoe removal, but that's about the only difference than the airport. And he's a million dollar employee who knows all the security people by name! It's a procedure, it's stupid, but it's just the way it is. Not one executive at that company has ever blown up a building or shot anyone at work, but they still treat them all "like criminals" (and not the white collar kind...   )

Does your friend have to go through security 10 times a day?

Is he strip-searched every time he needs to go to the bathroom?

Does he have to take off his shoes and belt in front of his employees every time he wants a cup of coffee?

Is he being harassed by security people who want to use their power impress upon him that they can dictate whatever he's going to do in the security check?

Also, there are many other facts that you should know about, such as: Many of the airports that this airline is flying to are small airports with very bad runways. The airport authorities cannot afford to upgrade the runways and make the airports safer. The reason? They're spending all their money on "security." One day, we could end up in a situation where two of these pilots will be killed because the authorities spend all their money on security, and none on safety.

I read "A weirdøe captain...." on the title.  

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14): It's a procedure, it's stupid, but it's just the way it is.

You seem to be defending the same procedures that you also acknowledge are stupid.

If the goal of terrorism is to have us all change our lives as a result of their actions, then allowing stupid security procedures is, in fact, a form of encouraging terrorism.

Perhaps the Norwegian pilot's point was that we should not accept these things as being "just the way it is."

In rural Norway there's no need to inspect pilots who emerge from small aircraft which they have obviously flown in.


However, in JFK and LHR it is clearly necessary to subject all crew to security checks. Pilots (there) can be of all races and appearances. There is no perfect way to separate real crews from Al Qaeda, so we must search everybody.

Otherwise it's like "Oh S*** that pilot just whipped out like 7 guns and is screaming Islamic slogans" etc etc. Pilots need to be searched to avoid that scenario.

I'm not defending the practices, I'm just appalled by the attitude of some of these pilots.

Then again, pilots and F/As and such have been found to be smuggling all sorts of contraband over the years, so the idea that all pilots are beyond reproach is not exactly supported by the facts, is it?

And of course there's nothing stopping a pilot from passing something to a passenger on a different plane who then uses it to bring down/hijack that plane, but I guess we can't consider that either?

Quoting ZKSUJ (Reply 13): I'm sure they can incorporate something into the airport ID. A magnetic chip or something... That might be cheaper

But IDs can be swapped/modified. Hard to do that with a fingerprint. Yes, it can be done, but it's harder.

Quoting AF340 (Reply 15): But pilots can do that up to 10 times a day

If you leave the building for any reason, you must do it again. Take a lunch meeting, back through security. Go out to dinner before returning to work until midnight? Back through security. Go outside for a smoke (smoking is illegal inside), back through security. Add that up for a smoker, it might be 10 times a day.

And there's even a bigger difference here. The entire building in question is owned and occupied by the company. At least at an airport, it's a third party check, where you have multiple companies and agencies who may not have 100% information on each other. Here, it's the guy's own company who does this every time he enters the building. They pay him close to a million bucks a year including bonuses, yet they make him do it each and every time just like the janitors and receptionists and one-time visitors.

He doesn't consider himself victimized. But he doesn't have an entitlement mentality.

Quoting Alias1024 (Reply 16): Pilots feel victimized because of the lack of common sense in the policies.

To be a victim, you must be treated differently than everyone else and be harmed. Pilots are treated NO differently than anyone else nor are they harmed, but they expect to be treated differently or they claim harm? Why is that defensible?

Quoting RedChili (Reply 17): Is he strip-searched every time he needs to go to the bathroom?

Pilots aren't either, so what's your point? Taking off your shoes is not being strip searched. When you are stripped searched, you'll know it...

And the bathroom thing is one absurd red-herring argument.

There aren't a lot of airports where the bathrooms are outside security (with none inside), and in those places, everyone has to do the same thing. But yes, if the bathrooms in his building were only operated in the lobby, then yes, he would have to I guess.

Quoting C680 (Reply 19): You seem to be defending the same procedures that you also acknowledge are stupid.

No, I'm not actually. I'm saying the rules may be stupid, but pilots aren't being singled out so they should stop complaining as if they are. This is the overreactive environment we live in. And frankly, it makes more sense to screen pilots at an airport than it does to screen executives at a company owned building. Are pilots subjected to security at their corporate headquarters? (seriously, I have no idea. are they?)

I'm saying that pilots want different treatment than everyone else, and this is just one more case of pilots considering themselves to be above the rest of the working world, not subjected to the same market realities, believing their job is the most stressful, most important, they work the most hours, they have to go through the most to get to "the top." I read the union statements on these forums over the years, and the pilot comments about how mistreated they are, both working pilots and aspiring pilots, and it comes off as this expectation of privilege and entitlement to riches. It is such a common attitude among pilots, at least if the union leadership and the comments by pilots on a.net are anything to go by. Maybe they aren't, but I don't see a lot of pilots chiming in to oppose the union view or the view of the most militant pilots on a.net...

Quoting Flighty (Reply 20): Pilots (there) can be of all races and appearances. There is no perfect way to separate real crews from Al Qaeda,

Ah yes, because I forgot, all terrorists have dark skin and carry a placard which says "I'm a terrorist". Genius. Or maybe you think that everyone in Norway is white and therefore not a terrorist??  

Quoting Mortyman (Thread starter): and reportedly screamed - 'I am no terrorist!'.

I was feeling mildly sympathetic towards the pilot right up until that point....

Every exception provides an oppurtunity that can be exploited. Provide enough oppurtunities and they will be exploited. As time passes there are always calls to weaken security and if the responsible parties bow to the pressure we end up back at the 'Bad Old Days'.

This is the line and this is were we make our stand!  

Quoting Flighty (Reply 20): In rural Norway there's no need to inspect pilots who emerge from small aircraft which they have obviously flown in. However, in JFK and LHR it is clearly necessary to subject all crew to security checks. Pilots (there) can be of all races and appearances. There is no perfect way to separate real crews from Al Qaeda, so we must search everybody

Surely the reason for the security is, that once passengers (or crew) enter the sterile area at even a rural airport as in this case, they can then disembark as transfer passengers, into a regional hub, and thus to an International airport without further security checks.

I feel for the pilot but he didn't need to throw a hissy fit.

BTW in the USA crew members in Uniform do not have to take off their shoes unless they set off the magnatometer.

they can also bring..... get this.... water thru security and worse.... hair gel.  

Security is just for show. nothing and I repeat nothing that they can do would be 100% secure. There will always be a risk. Just like getting on a bus or subway and even driving your car.

We need risk management and common sense. I don't think that we need to do away with basic screening but the hassle is getting out of control.

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 4): In Norway, you have a national ID card that when read could give the secure status, no need for removing shoes, and other nonsense, although bags would still need to go through X-rays outbound and customs if needed inbound on international non EC routes

As mentioned by other, we do not have a national ID card in Norway

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14): I have a good friend who's a VP at a major investment bank in NYC. Every day since 9/11, every single day, he must go through beefed up security to get into the building, which includes metal detectors and searching his bags and such. No shoe removal, but that's about the only difference than the airport.

The problem here is not the fact that the pilots has to go through security, but the treatment from the security staff. Some of them obviuosly feeling inferior as they couldn't get any other job than this, (as Walmart doesn't operate in Norway) are obviously having a complex against flying personel and have the need to insult the pilots and other crew

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14): in NYC. Every day since 9/11

Yes but AFAIK 9/11 did not happen in Northern Norway, neither involved citizens and politicians of Norway...

He is rightfully upset and is right in the way that terrorism has now found other targets than air transportation such as sending a suicide bomber in a crowd (nothing really new but it still is how most terrorism acts are operated). So either you leave air transportation in peace or you screen everybody everywhere in cars, trains, buses, on sidewalks and so on..

Quoting Mortyman (Reply 8): This is only one of several cases in Norway lately, concerning this issue. Several pilots have voiced their opinions on this issue and how they feel criminalized, being searched several times a day at various airports in Norway.

Hats off to them.

Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 25): Security is just for show. nothing and I repeat nothing that they can do would be 100% secure.

The problem is, the press and the general public A) don't realize this, and B) wouldn't accept it if they did.

The industry has, for the most part, accepted that the risk of airplane crashes cannot be completely eliminated....the risk can only be minimized. I wish everyone would apply the same logic toward security.

2H4

Quoting Mortyman (Thread starter): All a pilot needs to crash a plane is his hands.

Good point, which is exactly why the Boeing 797s and Airbus A360s will use computerized pilots who fly according to the exact instructions programmed into the aircraft by the FAA.... pshhhh whatever.

Pilots should have to go through annual extensive background checks and be questioned about every single run-in with law enforcement. Besides that, they should be able to simply put their bags thru the x-ray machine and waltz on through the metal detector without delay. If a pilot is going to do an act of terrorism, all he has to do is use his hands.. no weapons needed.

All I can say is:Hats off to him!

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21): There aren't a lot of airports where the bathrooms are outside security (with none inside), and in those places, everyone has to do the same thing. But yes, if the bathrooms in his building were only operated in the lobby, then yes, he would have to I guess.

Actually in many of the smaller airports here in Norway the bathrooms are outside the security zone (also the kiosks and cafeterias). So at these airports the pilots have to go through security everytime they are going to the bathroom or getting something to drink or eat.

Also remember that just a few years ago there were no security screening at all (even for PAX) at some of these airports, so the "development" has been rather extreme here.

I kind of fail to see the relevance of your comparison of the situations at airports in Norway and your friends firms in the US (where i guess the security is not just to protect against terrorism but crime in general). There is huge difference between LA and NYC in your part of the world and Sorkjosen and Berlevaag here in Norway.

'ikraamerika'

You seem to have a very large chip on your shoulder regarding airline pilots for some strange reason.

Perhaps you wanted to be one and could not make the grade ? Now all you can do is criticize, belittle and show your stunning ignorance of our profession.

Your obvious low self esteem is well deserved.

You must be a delight to work with.

Quoting AirTranTUS (Reply 9): What if the pilot is commuting in his uniform to his flight? Then he does not have the power to crash the plane and should probably be subject to the same requirements as other passengers since he is riding in back.

Some airlines, like Air France, don't allow their staff Pilots or F/A to wear their uniform whenever they commute or travel for personnal reasons.
Wearing the uniform is allowed only during the "mission" including on positionning flights.

Back to the Topic, I can understand this Nowegian Captain. Crews are often more checked than the passengers, it is just getting ridiculous in some airports. I personnaly had to change already 5 times my suitcase, because it was opened by the TSA and as we are obliged to lock our luggage, they just don't bother and break it, and I got my suitcase back half opened at CDG ... they just put a note inside saying something like "Ooops ! sorry ! we broke but that was for the "good cause" !

Its stupid to check a pilots shoes. They can push a switch and kill people quickly in the cockpit without the need of a bomb, and actually, driving the plane into a building cause 100 times more damage than "just" blowing up a plane with a bomb.

But...... this captain shouldn't take it so personally, he should have let it slide, let it go, and realized shoe checking is not in place to stop pilots smuggling bombs on board. Maybe he had zero patience left and he wanted to retire anyway.

I'd rather see pilots heads examined, to make sure they're psychologically fit.

So that another Silkair 185, or Egyptair 990 isnt happen.

I would not really think about quitting my job, just because of this securtity madness, I love aviation and flying to much. But I absolutely can follow the thinking of a person who feels to finish with all that hassle.

First of all, nothing against sercurity, it is a very important part making and keeping the airplane a safe matter of transport. But unfrotunately what we entered into the past five six years is nothing than madness. How can it be that here in Switzerland a pilot applying for a ID badge for an airport has to bring a criminal background check, while he had to bring one already to get his license? And if he goes for another category of license he needs another background check and another.... ???

Then whenever we enter an airside, we go trough the complete programm, exactly as our Norwegian collegues describe it. They take nailclippers from us and small pocket knifes, the very usual way. But Hey! By the law I do have to carry a crash axe in the cockpit and this is so for any transport category airplane.....anywhere in the world  So, are we really mad or do we just produce this security show to calm down everybody and to show them off, that "everything is safe and under control...."

Cheers
Legacy135  

Quoting Legacy135 (Reply 36):

A fire extinguisher to a persons head could do some damage as well   I agree with the extensive security check annually for pilots, and just the x-ray machine before a flight.

But luckily for us here in NZ, unless you are a driver of a 737 or larger, Beech, Q300 and ATR guys and their PAX go through without an x-ray machine or any form of security check.

Some posts on this thread make us imagine that Namsos Airport is somewhat smaller than LHR or JFK. It is!!!

Namsos Airport is one of several small strips (2,600 feet) on the Viderøe milk route with Dash-8-100 between Trondheim and Bodoe. It is first stop from Trondheim, just under a hundred miles and 35 minutes flight. It is right outside the city Namsos with 9,000 inhabitants and serves basically a community with 12,000 souls. In August this year it served 1,485 passengers. or 48 pax per day, and also got a new airport manager Mr. Arnt Olav Gartland, a new, young man right from security training course.

Very likely less than a handful of Viderøe captains have visited Namsos a few times a day, hundreds of days each year, year after year. Of course they have padded shoulders with the "old" airport manager thousands of times and had a ten minutes chat with him at most stopovers, sharing everything as close colleagues in the air transport business.

The bottom line of this whole issue must be that one Viderøe captain and airport manager Mr. Arnt Olav Gartland had a wrong chemical fit. And one day there was a lightning strike between the two gentlemen.

[Edited 2007-10-24 13:47:34]

I see the day when a suicide kook sticks a charge of dynamite up his rectum and for some unGodly reason, he's found out...can you image what we, the flying public will have to endure then?...We already see enough A__holes at the security checkpoints as it is...

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21): To be a victim, you must be treated differently than everyone else and be harmed. Pilots are treated NO differently than anyone else nor are they harmed, but they expect to be treated differently or they claim harm? Why is that defensible?

Pilots ARE treated differently, when you consider the bracket that they are in. Is it valid to compare them to passengers? No, of course not, you don't need background checks to be a passenger. When you look at pilots and TSA agents, however, the story becomes different.

At a bare minimum we've gone through the same background checks. That's where the similarities end though. The pilots have direct control of the airplane, immediate access to weapons once beyond the screeners, and have years of experience or at least an enormous investment in our careers. We go through security, often being hassled.

TSA screeners have no investment in their career other than whatever they can make up on "Why do you want to work for the TSA" (I love safety! Hate terrorism!). TSA agents are not directly effected by their actions, in any way. And by definition almost no TSA agents have "years of experience", seeing as the agency itself is just shy of 6 years old. They don't get screened.

Is it possible that a pilot will try and sneak something through to pass to a buddy? Sure, if they manage to slip through all those steps. Is it astronomically more likely that the exceptionally competent, experienced, dedicated, and educated TSA agents will slip one to their buddy? Oh yeah.


But hey, I guess that they know best, and that hassling pilots and making sure passengers only have 3oz of liquid in any one compartment (for the love of God don't combine!!!!!!!!!) isn't deterring them from detecting bomb parts being smuggled in.

Oh wait....

Quoting AF340 (Reply 2): I thought they did. They have their own customs line, at least at YYZ.

That's right, there is a crew Customs/Immigration line, not a crew security line. At YYZ, crew clear security in the same area and lines as passengers, for US and International flights.

Most airports do have employee/crew lines (at least in the US). If screened away from the pax, we can usually get by w/o taking off our shoes. Pilots may have to because I'd imagine their shoes have metal in them that would set off the metal detectors.

Quoting Pacallen (Reply 42): Pilots may have to because I'd imagine their shoes have metal in them that would set off the metal detectors.

Why metal? What kind of metal? Steel toed pilot shoes? Or do you mean eyelets for laces.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21): To be a victim, you must be treated differently than everyone else and be harmed. Pilots are treated NO differently than anyone else nor are they harmed, but they expect to be treated differently or they claim harm? Why is that defensible?

Did you not read what I wrote? They ARE treated differently than some other airport employees.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21): I'm not defending the practices, I'm just appalled by the attitude of some of these pilots. Then again, pilots and F/As and such have been found to be smuggling all sorts of contraband over the years, so the idea that all pilots are beyond reproach is not exactly supported by the facts, is it? And of course there's nothing stopping a pilot from passing something to a passenger on a different plane who then uses it to bring down/hijack that plane, but I guess we can't consider that either?

Contraband on a domestic flight? I have had my run in with security in Norway, have to bags one small and one bigger bag that are same otherwise,-can you open your bag and take out the liquids, the security officer told me and pointed at the
big bag.-I have no liquids in this bag I said, only in the small.-Yes, I can see it on the screen, said the SO. No, it´s in the small bag, I said. Where´s the small bag? asked the SO. And we looked into the x-ray machine and my bag was there,
opened it with a sigh and showed that the liquid (toothpaste and stuff) was proper packed as I bought it at Gardemoen. Uhh, said the SO.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21): I'm not defending the practices, I'm just appalled by the attitude of some of these pilots.

When HAVEN'T you been appalled at ANYTHING pilots do?

Quoting Bohlman (Reply 40): Pilots ARE treated differently, when you consider the bracket that they are in. Is it valid to compare them to passengers? No, of course not, you don't need background checks to be a passenger. When you look at pilots and TSA agents, however, the story becomes different. At a bare minimum we've gone through the same background checks. That's where the similarities end though. The pilots have direct control of the airplane, immediate access to weapons once beyond the screeners, and have years of experience or at least an enormous investment in our careers. We go through security, often being hassled. TSA screeners have no investment in their career other than whatever they can make up on "Why do you want to work for the TSA" (I love safety! Hate terrorism!). TSA agents are not directly effected by their actions, in any way. And by definition almost no TSA agents have "years of experience", seeing as the agency itself is just shy of 6 years old. They don't get screened. Is it possible that a pilot will try and sneak something through to pass to a buddy? Sure, if they manage to slip through all those steps. Is it astronomically more likely that the exceptionally competent, experienced, dedicated, and educated TSA agents will slip one to their buddy? Oh yeah. But hey, I guess that they know best, and that hassling pilots and making sure passengers only have 3oz of liquid in any one compartment (for the love of God don't combine!!!!!!!!!) isn't deterring them from detecting bomb parts being smuggled in. Oh wait....

  

Could not have summed it up better! You describe it exactly as it is! And what some people do not understand, if we as aircrew-members would intend to smuggle somewhat in or do whatever, we would know the way, even with the best screening and scanning. So as said before, most of those security checks the way they are practiced now are just pure nonsense!

Professional spot-checks would make much more sense, but............anyway, it is as it is   hopefully one day the world will become reasonable again.

Cheers
Legacy135  

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14): And BTW, For all you pilots who feel "victimized" you need a reality check. I have a good friend who's a VP at a major investment bank in NYC. Every day since 9/11, every single day, he must go through beefed up security to get into the building, which includes metal detectors and searching his bags and such. No shoe removal, but that's about the only difference than the airport. And he's a million dollar employee who knows all the security people by name! It's a procedure, it's stupid, but it's just the way it is. Not one executive at that company has ever blown up a building or shot anyone at work, but they still treat them all "like criminals" (and not the white collar kind... Wink ) But he's not going to quit over it or start yelling at people. Here at the movie studios in Los Angeles, cars are routinely searched, even executives and famous actors/directors. They check for bombs underneath and look in your trunk. Again, you know most of the security people, and in this case, if they know you, they may not do it every single day, but you'll still be checked routinely. And not one studio has ever been bombed or hijacked... I really feel that pilots consider themselves a special class of people sometimes, the way they talk about their mistreatment in all facets of their jobs as if the rest of the world is treated better and paid more. Where does this mentality come from?

I 100% agree all staff going into security areas at the airports should be screened .. I work for Air NZ and fly up and down the country we can go in and out of screening along with the pilots ..Do we complain no , we might not enjoy being screened all the time but hey its part of the job !!! I have never heard a pilot or cabin crew go off because of security screening its just a part of our lives in the job we choose to work at .. Just like your other examples if you dont like screening there is a simple answer get another job .. Because its not going to change since 9/11 ..

Quoting Legacy135 (Reply 36): They take nailclippers from us and small pocket knifes, the very usual way.

They take nailclippers away, but once through security, most airports have restaurants with metal knives.

Not to mention that most airports also sell alcohol on glass bottles. Any passenger can buy a bottle, grab it by the neck and crush it against a toilet or whatever, and the remaining neck will be far sharper and much more dangerous than a nailclipper in the hands of a pilot or a grandmother. But the airports make tons of money on selling that alcohol...