I've seen the same at IAH.. The entrance was also used by several FAMs..

A pilot made a video of what he viewed as security lapses at SFO.

The powers that be weren't impressed.

I remember. Poor guy lost his job, didn't he? :td:

Sometimes it seems as if no good deed goes unpunished. :(

I have no idea of the latest enhancements, but many say that the screening of employees varies from airport to airport e.g. this two-year-old Milwaukee article.

This is correct, but they are not flying but going to work. What I said was when airline employees fly we are screened like everyone else & so are TSA employees.

I'm still curious. Are you saying that's the case for every U.S. airport? One of the criticisms for several years has centered around the inconsistent policies of different airports?

Again, what you call a "slight" exception - the ability to demand the WTMD - would be an exception that would quiet a large percentage of complaints about current policies if the passengers could "opt out" in the same way.

What the disconnect seems to be here is that people think its acceptable for someone to not receive equal screening if they are not flying.

It shouldn't matter.

If an area is to be "secure", all people entering need to be subject to the same rules and regulations; no double standards.

Again, it wouldn't be out of the question for someone to influence an airport employee or TSA Screener to do something bad.

Already happened multiple times...we, the traveling public who are paying for TSA's security theater, are just lucky that, thus far, it's only been to smuggle drugs, guns, & inbound pax around customs.

Just a matter of time before it's something really 'bad' :rolleyes:

+1.

Not too mention, many times, airline/airport employees that travel for free, will enter the airport through their regular work access. I know this was the case at many airports I frequented when I was still working in the industry. As a standby passenger, there are many times you may not make a flight, so traveling employees would go and hang out where they have access to the airline system computers. Whether that be an operations area, break room, baggage area, they could chat with coworkers, check up on seating availability and go to the gate area when things looked good.

I know it's just semantics, but that's no true. When airline employees show up to work - to fly - they are NOT screened like everyone else. They get the privilege to:

Cut the line
Not take off shoes
Not have to Nude-o-Scope

I know I'm missing several other items they do not have to participate in.

When they fly out of uniform I know it's a different story, but it's the same person deemed at different levels of risk. Tell me what the difference is?

"the 9/11 hijackers were trained PILOTS"

Right. Trained on simulators, and skipped the "landing the plane" part of the course. :rolleyes:

:rolleyes: Just patently false, Sylvia.

You might do a bit of research before you post. By most accounts they weren't stellar pilots, but many held licenses, and (presumably) could have gotten jobs in the pre-9/11 era.

They probably would be able to get jobs in the post-9/11 era too. Both of them had pretty clean records leading up to 9/11.

Thanks for reminding us-we have at least one TSA screener, Ms. Wanda Weems, who did exactly that...came to EWR where she worked in her uniform, changed to civvies in the ladies room & then boarded her flight. She was only caught because someone saw her getting changed & reported her to the PAPD, as I recall, who then boarded the flight & pulled her, & her unscreened bag, off.

If one has done it, no doubt there are/were others who have done it & gotten away with it.

Therefore, anyone & everyone going to the 'sterile' side must be screened prior to entry regardless of reason. Anything less is nothing but security theater aka the TSA :td::td::td:

Being that it is a registered profession, please report him to the state medical board. State boards usually tend to take an interest in people who claim to be a registered professional who in reality are not. Civil (and potentially criminal) penalties can result from such false claims.

...

To get back on topic, I would agree that if all it takes is the background check, then it would likely be cheaper just to have the TSA perform the background check on everyone and only screen the people that would not be hireable by TSA. That should shorten the list greatly... ;)