TexasCHLforum.com

it's too darned expensive to fly if more than one person wants to go.
it's too darned painful on my hip to drive more than a few hours.
I think I'll just stay home anymore
dang I sound old, and I'm not even 50 yet.

Jumping Frog wrote:

StewNTexas wrote:I will never go through one of their machines. I am afraid any/some/all 'rays' might have some impact on the progarmming, which is extensive.

You do not have to go through any xray or other machines if you do not want to. You can request a search instead.

But I can understand and respect a decision to avoid flying under those circumstances.

I have to travel on business, so I simply put up with it.

Yeah, I opted out at LAX and was told to "stand right there while we get someone." "Right there" was less then 3 ft. away from a industrial refrigerator sized backscatter x-ray emitting machine. The guy didn't say anything, just looked at me kind of funny, as I was backing as far away from the machine as I could get and still be inside the designated area.

I can't believe the TSA makes them work around that stuff 8 hours a day and won't even allow them to have a radiation badge.

Jaguar wrote:I can't believe the TSA makes them work around that stuff 8 hours a day and won't even allow them to have a radiation badge.

Really? I would think that OSHA would require monitoring.

WildBill wrote:

Jaguar wrote:I can't believe the TSA makes them work around that stuff 8 hours a day and won't even allow them to have a radiation badge.

Really? I would think that OSHA would require monitoring.

It was a story for a while. They may have finally allowed it, but I haven't heard about it if so. A quick search brought me this, http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/yourlife ... side_N.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Since April 2009, the Army team also has been studying the radiation doses received by TSA workers at six airports, Philadelphia, Baltimore, West Palm Beach, Memphis, Los Angeles, Portland, Ore. The report is not yet final, but Szrom said all the data shows radiation exposure is low — "well below" limits that would require workers to routinely wear radiation monitoring badges.

So they may not be exposed to high levels under normal circumstances, but what about malfunctions? Would you want to know if you got a large dose if one of their machines messed up?

There's a difference between not requiring people to wear them and not allowing people to wear them.

tacticool wrote:There's a difference between not requiring people to wear them and not allowing people to wear them.

I don't see how the TSA could legallly prevent workers from wearing a radiation monitor.

Maybe I'm off base, but it was my understanding from reading various articles on the subject that the badges were not required, and frowned upon if not outright banned. Even if they are allowed but the employer won't pay for it, what is the cost of the badges and analyzing the results vs. the typical TSA worker's pay?

Jaguar wrote:Even if they are allowed but the employer won't pay for it, what is the cost of the badges and analyzing the results vs. the typical TSA worker's pay?

It's probably lower than the cost of their cell phone and service.

Jaguar wrote:Maybe I'm off base, but it was my understanding from reading various articles on the subject that the badges were not required, and frowned upon if not outright banned. Even if they are allowed but the employer won't pay for it, what is the cost of the badges and analyzing the results vs. the typical TSA worker's pay?

I don't know the pay of TSA employees, but I would think that the cost of monitoring is very expensive for an individual. I know that my company spends a lot of money for just monitoring and fitting respirators.

There are many companies who don't issue concealed handguns to their employees but that doesn't necessarily mean they prohibit employees from carrying where it's allowed by law.