TSA stupidity in PHX
 

One of the first trouble spots that emerged in Phoenix: Baggage handlers and other employees who worked outside weren't able to get their sunscreen through security because of the ban on liquids and gels. Ditto for extra drinks. They quickly found a way to deliver three vats of suntan lotion and extra water to workers who routinely endure temperatures as high as 145 degrees as they load and unload bags from planes.
http://www.azcentral.com/business/ar...ofile0827.html

BTW, a poster on usaviation reports the "vats" are 20 oz containers of SPF 20 sunscreen and that many rampers in PHX use SPF 50.

Now, uniformed flight crews with ID are allowed items such as toothpaste in their crew bags. One might think that the same standard could apply to uniformed rampers with ID to bring sunscreen to work in PHX of all places. But, this is the TSA we're talking about here. Of course, if the airside gift shops in PHX are like the ones in ORD or LAX, sunscreen is available to purchase. Doing so every day would get expensive.

Sandwiches with mayo and ketchup are being confiscated from lunchboxes as well, according to the poster.
http://www.usaviation.com/forums/ind...ic=30557&st=15


Now, having said this, I do think the fountains in YVR being closed is even more stupid. But you can't blame the TSA for that one.

I think every employee, badged/uniformed or not, should be subjected to the same stupid harassment rules that the passengers, aka the customers are.

If they don't like it, as I imagine they would not, they should chase Comrade Kip Hawley up a tree and set fire to it.

I respectfully disagree.

Why do you disagree, if I may ask?

Spiff, if I would try to post that here it would take a book. Let's just say when you have had the background checks we've had & been employed as long as most of us have(my airline anyway) there is nothing to worry about.

Probably works for an airline in a role where he can get away with taking stuff on. :rolleyes: I think it's ridiculous flight crews can take stuff on and we can't. I personally would subject to a full background check to be able to carry what I used to carry on. I dont' get why we don't switch to a system like that if the flight crews are allowed to carry on. I would even pay for the background check.

No "sleeper" employees? What about all the TSA agents who steal and have passed background checks? Or baggage handlers?

TSA, I agree with where I work the other just does NOT happen.

Some of us have been through background checks that make yours look like a cakewalk.. :rolleyes:

Your background checks are nothing more than a criminal history check and potentially a credit check.

I agree that the indoor airport employees and flight crews should be subjected to the same stupid rules as the rest of us (depending on one's point of view either because a) it "enhances security" by keeping even more "dangerous liquids" off planes; after all, we can't even trust a bottle of water purchases airside not to explode, :rolleyes: or b) by subjecting them to the same crap they are more likely to complain and less likely to tell their customers "it's not so bad," or "anything for security.").

But for anyone who works outside, I disagree. I personally think any group who is being told to work outside in that type of climate without being allowed sunscreen (and presumably also not allowed unlimited water on demand) should do all of the following: a) immediately strike and refuse to work under those conditions, b) contact whatever agency deals with occupational health violations in that state, and c) contact a lawyer to discuss action against the airline, airport, TSA, police, and/or anyone else suggesting they work under these condititions.

I generally do not support employees/employers punishing customers due to labor spats (i.e., strikes/lockouts) because the loser ends up being the paying customer (ref: some of my inflammatory posts in the NW forum re: my opinion of CHAOS :) ), but I would wholeheartedly support the ramp workers if they did this and shut down a whole lot of airports. Skin cancer is not to be toyed with.

Neither is dehydration!

Sorry, but those background checks are cursory at best. A check for criminal activity, immigration status, outstanding warrants, and in the case of pilots, medical history to check against the class of FAA medical being applied for.

If you think these airline/AOA background checks are sufficient to weed out suspected troublemakers, I have some land to sell you. The TSA, with its own so-called fancy background checks, has hired more criminals than the Gambino crime family. We're not amateurs here - many FT posters have extensive backgrounds in aviation, security, international affairs, government, the law, and many have current or previous secret level government clearances.

However, I am going to approach this from another angle - we want you to go through the same hassle as the customers do so you can suffer along with us and offer your own protest against this lunacy. If you're immune to the effects, you won't protest. If you have to suffer, the voices of industry professionals might carry abit more weight than the customers which the TSA cares little about.

I agree that dehydration is not to be toyed with, but dehydration at least has the benefit of being fairly immediate and obvious.

If you force employees to work in the heat with grossly inadequate water, they will soon (within hours or less) start to suffer symptoms which will prevent them from doing the job at all. So the employer has an immediate motivation to fix the problem.

On the other hand, months of working with grossly inadequate sun protection may lead to sunburns but probably won't stop people from working. By showing up much later and not directly impacting the job at hand, skin cancer is much more insidious.

I want to add my comments were focused on indoor employees - keeping the outdoor workers from sunscreen and water is downright criminal.

I am surprised they didn't all walk off the job in protest. How are they expected to perform without water? What if someone gets a skin cancer in 5 or 10 years...they could trace liability back to a sunburn they received on the job now, and probably make a good case for it.

I think the point is that badge or no badge, background check or no background check, everyone in or around airplanes should be subject to the same screening requirements. There's no reason why ramp personnel and outside TSA agents can't be as creative and resourceful as the rest of us have had to be lately. When you've sweated off all that sunscreen, what's to prevent you from leaving the sterile area, re-applying sunscreen, and coming back through screening?

You might also try a liquid sunscreen such as Clinique, provided you can buy it in 4oz quantities.

Also, please recognize that there are many of us here on FT who have had more thorough & frequent background investigations and have held (or do now hold) higher security clearances than most of your colleagues could imagine, so the background investigation argument falls on lots of deaf ears.

Ultimately, it will take all of us being hassled together and putting money where our mouths are in order to put enough pressure on Comrades Chertoff and Hawley to put an end to this nonsense. Maybe the airline employees unions should authorize a strike?

The key to get rid of this lunacy is to make sure even the private jets and flights taken by congressmen/women are subjected to the same rules. Imagine what happens then. I remember reading an article last year where a Senator got mad when TSA made him go thorough the procedure. He complained saying that he was "A US Senator"!

Makes perfect sense. I have seen Pilots never removing their shoes!

I think most of us can agree that the "liquid rules" go too far for both customers and crews. But while not being able to carry on toiletries is a major pain the rear, it is not on the same level as not being able to bring something that is needed for workplace health and safety. While US did the right thing by making "vats" of sunscreen available for the rampers, they will be come (if it has not alredy) when the "vats" (at hwatever SPF) will run dry. There are (probably) water fountains available in the ramp ready rooms. But if I were loading bags in the Arizona heat, I would want to have my own bottle of water with me, not have to scurry over to the water fountain for a swig of tap water between flights. There is also the double standards of the crew being able to bring toothpaste and hand lotion, while another class of employess are not exempt, at least in PHX.

No disrespect coachrowsey. But, let's see...

Aldrich Ames:
CIA spy who betrayed his country in a very major way.

The Cambridge Spies:
Philby, Burgess and McLean and Anthony Blunt put real British class into espionage.

Klaus Fuchs:
A member of the famed Manhattan Project who developed the atomic bomb, but he turned traitor and gave the plans to the Russians.

Robert Hanssen:Respected FBI agent, family man and staunch Catholic conservative leads a double life spying for the Russians, hanging around strip clubs and surfing Internet porn sites.

Do you think any of these fine gentlemen had background checks?

I want to thank you for all of the good comments ref. outside employees. I agree with you 100% on this. I am in the process of trying to get some one who works the ramp in PHX to register & post here as he can speak of what is going on there much better.
As for some of the other comments about background checks, no one will win in arguement here so I will just respect everyones opinion as we all have one.
As far as employees being subjected to the same bans as psgrs, speaking for myself only, I have chosen not to fly till this crap changes even cancelling a vac. trip I planned. I understand most of you may not have that choice, but if you do you might want to consider it.

Folks, anything can happen at anytime, but do we have to be a bunch of cowards ?

What are being cowardly about? Not gleefully submitting to the whims and demands of the incompetent criminal leadership of the TSA/DHS?

Or not being strong enough in our resolve to depose such leadership and eliminate these two bureaucratic blights?

The background checks you have had are a joke. They are the same crap one can get on ussearch (or one of those types of sites) for $50.

As I mention on another thread, I've had a background check that makes the SIDA process look like kindergarten, yet I'm still checking my liquids. A background check also makes you no less likely to decide to lose it in the future.

I believe one of the gentlemen who was arrested at LHR had the "all access airport pass."

So yes, it does happen.

You entirely misread my post. I was just making a point that just having a background check doesn't mean someone is "trustworthy" as you insinuated.

I don't think any passenger needs to go through this asinine nonsense. We have indeed become cowards - pretending people are more trustowrthy because they went through a "background check" is complete nonsese.

The only reason I want to see the crew subjected to the same screening and carry-on requirements is so that they can complain - loudly - right now, they have no incentive to do so.

Gee, too bad all of those rampers working for AS in SEA (THEIR HOME BASE MIND YOU) no longer have union protection.... And I totally disagree regarding allowing outside employees free reign, although really they already have it since they don't need to go any further than our bags to get the banned items they need.

What's the turn over rate at Menzies? And the pay scale? That alone should be common knowledge then perhaps Ma and Pa Kettle may no longer feel like they are being protected by having their shoes xrayed and their hand lotion confiscated.

Screening is an absolute farce. I went through two separate screens with a tube of gel in my carry on and after the second screen at the gate I inquired if they cared about the gel in the outside pocket The TSA agent was miffed and stated yes, asked which pocket, I indicated the left pocket. She pulled it out, inspected the Rx label then returned it to its pocket and left the right hand pocket completely untouched.

Last flight, exhausted running for the plane throwing everything liquid in a box to be checked I missed my lipstick, hand lotion and Taco Bell packets in my coat pocket (don't know if hot sauce is allowed? perhaps only if it is cholula). Discovered them upon landing. My jacket went through the belt.

What is the point? Barely screened, highly transient rampers are running around on the tarmac (perhaps not in PHX but definitely in SEA) and should be allowed full access to items that are banned while law abiding citizens are not allowed to travel with water?

When this stupid CRISIS :rolleyes: liquid ban took effect I was consoled because I figured there was no way they would try to make these bans permanent.

Frankly, as far as I am concerned, I would rather have my or my children's plane blown out of the sky rather than undergo these STUPID protections because I know damn good and well that if/when it happens again the policies we now have in place are about as effective as stopping a wife beater with a restraining order. The real freaks are always going to "Get 'er Done".

-A