Waltrip Steven - Aircrew Security A Practical Guide

First published 2004 by Ashgate Publishing

Published 2016 by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

Copyright Clois Williams and Steven Waltrip 2004

Clois Williams and Steven Waltrip have asserted their right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as the authors of this work.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Notice:
Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Williams, Clois

Aircrew security : a practical guide
1.Aeronautics, Commercial - Security measures 2.Crimes
aboard aircraft 3.Crimes aboard aircraft - Psychological
aspects 4.Flight crews - Training of 5. Aeronautics,
Commercial - Law and legislation
I.Title II.Waltrip, Steven
363.124

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Williams, Clois.

Aircrew security : a practical guide / Clois Williams and Steven Waltrip.

p. cm.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

1. Flight crews--Protection. 2. Aeronautics--Security measures. 3. Human behavior. I.

Waltrip, Steven. II. Title.
ISBN 978-0-7546-4076-9
TL553.6.W56 2003
629.130289--dc22

2003063541

ISBN 9780754640769 (hbk)

Transfered to Digital Printing in 2009

Unfortunately, as each airline put together its security programs as dictated by further guidance provided by the Transportation Security Administration (ISA) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), it became evident that training was for the most part, minimal. Flight crews from various major airlines have expressed their dismay and disdain for their new program. The responsibility of interpreting legislation and guidance was left to airlines as they determined what information would be provided to the crews, in what manner, and in what length of time.

The financial effects of 9/11 have pushed airlines into the worst economic period they have ever experienced. Because of this predicament, money was and continues to be extremely tight at most airlines. The costs of security program development and implementation have added to the financial woes they are experiencing. Doing what was most economically feasible compromised doing what was right. Variations between airline programs were amazing and yet all programs were eventually approved by the FAA/TSA.

A few of the major airlines flight attendant unions rebelled against minimal training and convinced their airlines to reconsider the self-defensive portion of their training. At least two American airlines have enlisted the aid of outside vendors to provide additional self-defense training to crewmembers on a volunteer basis. Volunteer basis? Sounds like a way of skirting the issues of providing effective, mandatory self-defense training as required by ATSA. Something is wrong with this line of thinking! Yes, flight crews are protecting their own lives with self-defense training; however, in the big picture are they not defending the companys passengers, aircraft and cargo, not to mention thousands of people on the ground? Individual personal protection training IS highly recommended, but not as a substitute for training that should be provided for flight crews by any company operating any kind of aircraft.

With the passage of the Homeland Security Act (H.R., 5005) in the United States, American flight crews are to receive additional training in self-defense. Will this legislation be strong enough to cause a significant positive change in crewmember training? Some doubt that it will, but time will tell whether the legislation has any substance to it. However, the legislation is supposed to provide additional time requirements for training of flight attendants in self-defense tactics as well as for arming pilots. It is evident the emphasis on security training is a serious step toward correcting the deficiencies of the ATSA. It is imperative that all crewmembers receive the most current and effective training available today. Will this legislation correct the deficiencies?

There are always exceptions. One particular U.S. airline in particular we have first hand knowledge of, took impressive steps to train their crews. Their management felt very strongly their crews should receive the most comprehensive training available. Their highly successful two-day course incorporates academics and hands on self-defense methods that have been in place since May 2002. Crewmembers who work there have given it very high marks on their critiques of the course. This airlines security training should be the benchmark for all crew security training. We are not mentioning their name here for security reasons.