CNN: Air marshals surveyed about misconduct, retaliation within agency
Mar 2, 2011, 5:56 pm
#31
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 843
Tactics have evolved. I know the Director of the FAMS stated it had nothing to do with what the airlines wanted. Take that for what it is worth.
Mar 2, 2011, 6:41 pm
#33
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: CLT
Programs: Choice Hotels/FFOCUS
Posts: 7,256
Mar 2, 2011, 9:21 pm
#34
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Programs: AA (Life Plat), Marriott (Life Titanium) and every other US program
Posts: 6,411
The number of FAM's, in First Class aisle seats, working in pairs, has declined *precipitously* as of about a year ago. It is quite obvious to a serious observer (unless the tactics have evolved to the point where they hire FAM's under the age of 18, over the age of 80, and allow them to drink alcohol).
Mar 4, 2011, 10:10 pm
#35
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: PDX
Programs: Delta 360, Alaska Gold, Hilton Gold, Marriot Gold
Posts: 92
The number of FAM's, in First Class aisle seats, working in pairs, has declined *precipitously* as of about a year ago. It is quite obvious to a serious observer (unless the tactics have evolved to the point where they hire FAM's under the age of 18, over the age of 80, and allow them to drink alcohol).
Mar 4, 2011, 10:45 pm
#36
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Programs: UA/CO(1K-PLT), AA(PLT), QR, EK, Marriott(PLT), Hilton(DMND)
Posts: 9,538
Mar 4, 2011, 10:46 pm
#37
Suspended
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: USA
Programs: UA/CO(1K-PLT), AA(PLT), QR, EK, Marriott(PLT), Hilton(DMND)
Posts: 9,538
The number of FAM's, in First Class aisle seats, working in pairs, has declined *precipitously* as of about a year ago. It is quite obvious to a serious observer (unless the tactics have evolved to the point where they hire FAM's under the age of 18, over the age of 80, and allow them to drink alcohol).
Mar 5, 2011, 6:42 am
#39
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 4,531
Oddly, the original post was about continual management and professionalism problems, yet FTers flock to the "stealing F seats."
That may be a legitimate concern, but to me the most pressing concerns are:
1) Continual absence of professional standards for this program
2) Incalculable cost/benefit ratio
That may be a legitimate concern, but to me the most pressing concerns are:
1) Continual absence of professional standards for this program
2) Incalculable cost/benefit ratio
Mar 5, 2011, 7:26 am
#40
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 843
Oddly, the original post was about continual management and professionalism problems, yet FTers flock to the "stealing F seats."
That may be a legitimate concern, but to me the most pressing concerns are:
1) Continual absence of professional standards for this program
2) Incalculable cost/benefit ratio
That may be a legitimate concern, but to me the most pressing concerns are:
1) Continual absence of professional standards for this program
2) Incalculable cost/benefit ratio
Last edited by Good Guy; Mar 5, 2011 at 8:50 am
Mar 5, 2011, 7:36 am
#41
Original Member
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Orange County, CA, USA
Programs: AA (Life Plat), Marriott (Life Titanium) and every other US program
Posts: 6,411
No, I am saying that I don't believe FAM's are allowed to drink a significant amount of alcohol while on duty, so I mentally eliminate people who are: a) under 18 years; b) over 80 years; c) over 300 pounds; d) drink heavily.
Mar 5, 2011, 8:18 am
#42
Join Date: Sep 2005
Programs: AA EXP, AAirpass, & CK 2MM, MR Plat Premier, DL Plat, US Plat, UA RECOVERING GS
Posts: 2,620
You're joking, right?
Lifetime bureaucrats running an inept and completely impotent organization that hasn't stopped a single terrorist attack are doing right by the American public? I'd hate to see a direct that didn't do right by the American public.
Do you really expect a bunch of current FAMs to tell the reporter, "yeah man, our jobs are totally pointless. Congress should just nuke our funding!!! We're terrible."
As to the single current FAM, you know a few FAMs and the reporter interviewed a few FAMs. Why is your opinion better qualified?
They're motivated? I suppose if someone was of a law enforcement/controlling frame of mind but didn't want to actually engage any bad guys, they'd be quite happy pointlessly flying around with only a one-in-a-few-billion-chance of encountering any danger. Based on an article I read detailing "A day in the life" of a FAM, I fly more miles per year than they do. I'm not at any real risk of dying at the hands of the evil "tearists" (aka terrorists).
I know Director Bray has implemented what he calls a "Culture of Accountability" in the FAM service. I believe he is very interested in the professionalism of the organization. From my view point, the FAMS has come a long way. The last two directors, Brown, and Bray, have done right by the FAM's and the American public.
To get back to the OP article. It seems to me most of the information the reporter got was from former air marshals. He also quotes one current FAM. I only know a few current FAM's.
As to the single current FAM, you know a few FAMs and the reporter interviewed a few FAMs. Why is your opinion better qualified?
Their (sic) highly trained, professional, and from what I see, highly motivated individuals who enjoy what they do.
Mar 5, 2011, 8:54 am
#43
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 843
Nope.
Well that's one opinion.
Not if they believe in what they do.
I know more than a few. You'll have to trust me on this one. 
You read an article? I bow to your expert opinion then. And you fly more miles? I'm sure you drive a bigger truck too.
Lifetime bureaucrats running an inept and completely impotent organization that hasn't stopped a single terrorist attack are doing right by the American public? I'd hate to see a direct that didn't do right by the American public.
Do you really expect a bunch of current FAMs to tell the reporter, "yeah man, our jobs are totally pointless. Congress should just nuke our funding!!! We're terrible."
As to the single current FAM, you know a few FAMs and the reporter interviewed a few FAMs. Why is your opinion better qualified?
They're motivated? I suppose if someone was of a law enforcement/controlling frame of mind but didn't want to actually engage any bad guys, they'd be quite happy pointlessly flying around with only a one-in-a-few-billion-chance of encountering any danger. Based on an article I read detailing "A day in the life" of a FAM, I fly more miles per year than they do. I'm not at any real risk of dying at the hands of the evil "tearists" (aka terrorists).