FAM Fired for Revealing Info Deemed “Sensitive” After He Revealed It
May 11, 2013, 9:18 pm
#181
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2012
Programs: A3, AA. Plasticy things! That give me, y'know, Stuff!
Posts: 6,293
May 11, 2013, 9:33 pm
#182
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 221
Are you a "betting man?"
From the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's UNANIMOUS April 26, 2013 decision:
From the July 25, 2011 UNANIMOUS 3 U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board members' ruling -- which was vacated by the Federal Circuit:
From the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's UNANIMOUS April 26, 2013 decision:
Because Mr. MacLean’s disclosure is not “specifically prohibited by law” within the meaning of the WPA, we vacate the Board’s decision and remand for a determination whether Mr. MacLean’s disclosure qualifies for WPA protection. For example, it remains to be determined whether Mr. MacLean reasonably believed that the content of his disclosure evidenced a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.
. . .
WALLACH, Circuit Judge, concurring. Mr. MacLean presented substantial evidence that he was not motivated by personal gain but by the desire to
protect the public.
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/...-24-2013.1.PDF
. . .
WALLACH, Circuit Judge, concurring. Mr. MacLean presented substantial evidence that he was not motivated by personal gain but by the desire to
protect the public.
http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/...-24-2013.1.PDF
We also accept, without finding, that the appellant believed he did the right thing in disclosing the information. We have specifically considered the appellant’s testimony regarding his belief that TSA’s plan to eliminate FAMs from overnight flights was “serious” and “dangerous to the … public,” and that his disclosure was motivated by his desire to protect the flying public.(“All I wanted to do was protect lives and . . . uphold the
law.”). The appellant also testified: “If I saved – if I saved a plane from falling out of the sky or saved a life, I believe I did my job, and I shouldn’t regret it.” Further, as the administrative judge concluded, we also have no reason to doubt that the appellant’s motivation was sincere. (the administrative judge, when discussing the appellant’s First Amendment claim, stated that he had “no reason to doubt the appellant’s assertion that he took these actions to benefit the nation . . . .”).
http://www.mspb.gov/netsearch/viewdo...cation=ACROBAT
law.”). The appellant also testified: “If I saved – if I saved a plane from falling out of the sky or saved a life, I believe I did my job, and I shouldn’t regret it.” Further, as the administrative judge concluded, we also have no reason to doubt that the appellant’s motivation was sincere. (the administrative judge, when discussing the appellant’s First Amendment claim, stated that he had “no reason to doubt the appellant’s assertion that he took these actions to benefit the nation . . . .”).
http://www.mspb.gov/netsearch/viewdo...cation=ACROBAT
Last edited by willpolice4food; May 11, 2013 at 9:38 pm
May 12, 2013, 7:55 am
#183
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 4,332
According to this article, FAMs must complete a QUARTERLY physical fitness test involving a minimum number of pullups, pushups and situps in a minute, and complete a 1-1/2 mile run.
http://www.federalnewsradio.com/482/...he-air-threats
So, if this guy goes back into service, his quarterly quals will be years out of date, which means that he will probably have to update his quarterly quals immediately upon reinstatement, and continue them every quarter afterward for the duration of his employment.
May 12, 2013, 9:12 am
#184
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 221
I don't want to get into the middle of your argument, but...
According to this article, FAMs must complete a QUARTERLY physical fitness test involving a minimum number of pullups, pushups and situps in a minute, and complete a 1-1/2 mile run.
http://www.federalnewsradio.com/482/...he-air-threats
So, if this guy goes back into service, his quarterly quals will be years out of date, which means that he will probably have to update his quarterly quals immediately upon reinstatement, and continue them every quarter afterward for the duration of his employment.
According to this article, FAMs must complete a QUARTERLY physical fitness test involving a minimum number of pullups, pushups and situps in a minute, and complete a 1-1/2 mile run.
http://www.federalnewsradio.com/482/...he-air-threats
So, if this guy goes back into service, his quarterly quals will be years out of date, which means that he will probably have to update his quarterly quals immediately upon reinstatement, and continue them every quarter afterward for the duration of his employment.
May 13, 2013, 4:27 am
#185
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: HNL
Programs: UA/Hawaiian/Marriott
Posts: 840
.................................................. ..............................................
Last edited by Bearcat06; May 13, 2013 at 4:34 am Reason: Not going to get banned due to bobby the troll.....
May 13, 2013, 4:39 am
#186
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: HNL
Programs: UA/Hawaiian/Marriott
Posts: 840
Your google skills suck Bobby.....don't you have some houses to build......?
http://www.nbc-2.com/story/14627976/...ness-standards
http://forums.officer.com/member.php?u=44123
Wow....look who got banned from over there after he showed up using his real name and made a fool of himself....then showed up using a few more screen names before he finally left.....
Damn.....I need to do better google checks of screen names when I discuss things online with folks.
Bye-Bye Bobby......done playing with you......
Last edited by Bearcat06; May 13, 2013 at 5:30 am
May 13, 2013, 11:46 am
#187
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 221
Your google skills suck Bobby.....don't you have some houses to build......?
http://www.nbc-2.com/story/14627976/...ness-standards
http://forums.officer.com/member.php?u=44123
Wow....look who got banned from over there after he showed up using his real name and made a fool of himself....then showed up using a few more screen names before he finally left.....
Damn.....I need to do better google checks of screen names when I discuss things online with folks.
Bye-Bye Bobby......done playing with you......
http://www.nbc-2.com/story/14627976/...ness-standards
http://forums.officer.com/member.php?u=44123
Wow....look who got banned from over there after he showed up using his real name and made a fool of himself....then showed up using a few more screen names before he finally left.....
Damn.....I need to do better google checks of screen names when I discuss things online with folks.
Bye-Bye Bobby......done playing with you......
May 13, 2013, 10:31 pm
#189
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: HNL
Programs: UA/Hawaiian/Marriott
Posts: 840
God help the guys I know....and you don't go to any of those field offices.....last thing they need is you running around running your mouth off to the media and/or having to actually take action when you've been out of the job for so long.....and depending on you for back-up.......
May 13, 2013, 10:33 pm
#190
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: HNL
Programs: UA/Hawaiian/Marriott
Posts: 840
May 15, 2013, 10:31 am
#191
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: PDX
Programs: TSA Refusenik charter member
Posts: 15,978
Folks,
Stick to the topic at hand rather than tossing brickbats at one another. If we're called to take action on this thread again violators will find themselves riding in Randy's RV. Thanks.
--------
essxjay
TS/S moderator
Stick to the topic at hand rather than tossing brickbats at one another. If we're called to take action on this thread again violators will find themselves riding in Randy's RV. Thanks.
--------
essxjay
TS/S moderator
May 15, 2013, 10:49 am
#192
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 221
If Bearcat06's unsubstantiated posts are allowed to stay, then I should be able to respond to them with facts.
May 27, 2013, 1:56 pm
#193
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 221
Today's LOS ANGELES TIMES story
Today's LOS ANGELES TIMES story:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...,3867802.story
For too long this fact has gone unnoticed or glossed-over by the administrative judges. The hypocrisy here is vivid. The TSA has argued for years that MacLean should have known how terrible and dangerous his disclosure was, yet it took them almost FIVE MONTHS to dig up some way to justify termination.
Do you leave an admitted arsonist with a book of matches and a blow-torch alone in fireworks factory??? This is smoking-gun evidence of the TSA's devious and retaliatory tactics.
It was odd, he said, that after [ Robert MacLean's ] admissions the TSA left him on active duty for almost five months with access to classified information although his case was described by the head of the Air Marshal Service [ Thomas Quinn ] "as one of the most heinous leaks" related to the agency's operations.
For too long this fact has gone unnoticed or glossed-over by the administrative judges. The hypocrisy here is vivid. The TSA has argued for years that MacLean should have known how terrible and dangerous his disclosure was, yet it took them almost FIVE MONTHS to dig up some way to justify termination.
Do you leave an admitted arsonist with a book of matches and a blow-torch alone in fireworks factory??? This is smoking-gun evidence of the TSA's devious and retaliatory tactics.
May 27, 2013, 2:46 pm
#194
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,513
He sure is arrogant:
"I'm confident I will be reinstated. It's just a matter of how long the government wants to delay it," MacLean said. "It's very easy now to armchair-quarterback my actions, but given the culmination of events in July 2003, any law enforcement officer today would have done what I did."
Aug 30, 2013, 5:44 am
#195
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 221
Your tax-dollars are hard at work!
http://www.federaltimes.com/apps/pbc...=2013307110013
Response:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/160472134
The Department of Homeland Security is faulting a three-judge appellate court panel for “fundamental errors” in its April ruling in favor of Robert MacLean, a former air marshal who is citing whistleblower protections in fighting the agency’s decision to fire him.
Response:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/160472134