Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

San Francisco Airport Workers Upset They May Lose Jobs Over Citizenship
AP Breaking news ^ | 11/24/2001 | Karen Gaudette Associated Press Writer

Posted on 11/24/2001 9:24:45 PM PST by KQQL

San Francisco Airport Workers Upset They May Lose Jobs Over Citizenship

By Karen Gaudette Associated Press Writer
Published: Nov 24, 2001

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Security screeners at San Francisco International Airport are upset that they could lose their jobs under a new federal law requiring them to gain U.S. citizenship, and the city's mayor has offered to intervene. Some workers have threatened a sickout Sunday that could create kinks as travelers return from the biggest travel weekend of the year. But airport and union officials said the majority of workers were expected to report to work.

"We understand from the union that they're confident there won't be any type of action," airport duty manager Bob Rotiski said Saturday. "The union has a good feel for what the employees are going to do, and they've assured us that they're not going to walk out."

SFO spokesman Ron Wilson said workers' supervisors would fill in for employees who do not come to work.

The new federal law requires all security screeners to become U.S. citizens within a year. Leaders of Service Employees International Union Local 790 say as many as 80 percent of the 1,200 screeners at SFO are legal residents, not citizens. Those not already on the cusp of attaining citizenship could lose their jobs, said Daz Lampares, SFO representative for the union.

Union leaders say they hope workers stay on the job Sunday and let SFO director John Martin and San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown negotiate with Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta on a plan that would allow the busiest airports to employ some non-citizens.

The mayor "has definitely indicated he would try to talk with federal officials," said Brown's spokesman, P.J. Johnston. "This is not a typical labor issue where the workers have a beef with management. This is a situation that's been handed down from the federal government."

Johnston said no meeting has been scheduled and he is unsure what type of plan Brown would submit.

Wilson said airport officials empathize with the workers, but worry a walkout would shut down the airport and hurt chances of a compromise.

AP-ES-11-24-01 2054EST


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 last
To: KQQL
What? Must be a CITIZEN to work this job? Hmmm.... so LET the non-citizens go on strike!! Better, yet, have them LEAVE THE COUNTRY. Put the National Guard to work in these spots until we can get enough REAL citizens hired, trained, etc. There are a lot of folks out of work these days; most probably many of them would be willing and able to take one of these positions. Let's give it a shot, shall we??????
41 posted on 11/25/2001 12:21:27 AM PST by Califreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
I thought the whole idea was to not keep the same people who are working airport security now, because they are doing a terrible job and need to be a government payroll before we can feel safe getting on an airplane.

How does negotiating different contracts for SFO aliens make air travel safer?

42 posted on 11/25/2001 12:26:05 AM PST by Bernard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
And one more statistic that should concern us: At a starting salary of $35,000 plus benefits (according to the AP), these uneducated screeners will be making far more than the first-year teacher struggling to pay off his or college debts and live from paycheck to paycheck to pay the overhead costs of food and shelter.

Yep. We must retract the welcome wagon band to the America of the '80s and '90s and re-enact the values and sovereignty of a past America! Unfortunately, our proud land can only be set right again when all the liberals have been vanquished to Siberia. And that will take longer than my patience allows.

Best wishes.


43 posted on 11/25/2001 12:33:05 AM PST by Penny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bernard
Are you a total IDIOT??? NOTHING THAT GOT ON THOSE PLANES ON 911 WERE PROHIBITED ITEMS.......I REPEAT NOTHING THAT GOT ON THOSE PLANES ON 911 WERE PROHIBITED ITEMS PER FAA REGULATIONS........DO NOT BE AM IMBECILE AND INDICT THE SCREENERS FOR SOMETHING THEY DID NOT DO. IF YOU MUST INSIST ON PLACING BLAME HOW ABOUT TRYING x42?
44 posted on 11/25/2001 12:39:06 AM PST by silverkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
San Francisco Airport Workers Upset They May Lose Jobs Over Citizenship

Grab a violin and sing me a sob story.

45 posted on 11/25/2001 1:31:02 AM PST by Hillary 666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
A boo hoo bump for later
46 posted on 11/25/2001 2:02:07 AM PST by quietolong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nuke'm Glowing
But then again, going from asking people about "super-sizing" their meals to security is truely one hell of a leap.
Nah, the security screeners do not have the level of personal hygene required for food service.
47 posted on 11/25/2001 2:14:34 AM PST by eno_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
Snorfle. Watch the Democrass rewrite the Snivel Circus code to allow illegal aliens to be federal employees. Hi, My name is Jose. Don you love my cool gang tattoos? I come to the US while smoggling drugs n now I am the airport security guy. Izn America wun beeg peegeon? Theese is my fren Akbar an theese eese my fren Ivan. Akbar came here to flight school and Ivan come here to smoggle drogs, too. Now they are the airport security guys.
48 posted on 11/25/2001 2:26:36 AM PST by Madame X
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hillary 666
As I understand the story (which doesn't mean that this is the truth, just that this is what the story said) the problem is that the screeners see the law as requiring all persons holding or applying for these jobs as federalized airport secuity baggage screeners to be citizens or to become citizens within one year.

It has been reported that the average airport secuity employee stays on the job less than one year. By law, it takes 5 years to become a citizen. Therefore, it is likely that the vast majority of the current non-citizen employees could not possibly meet the citizenship criteria if they wanted to. That, I devive from the story as posted, is the essence of their complaint.

That said, I don't particularly care whether they have to look for other work or not. The (ostensible) purpose of the legislation federalizing airport security was to change it from a low wage, short-term job to a law enforcement type career, and there-by change the type of people who would seek and get such jobs. While I am skeptical about whether this will be effective, certainly one of the things we should expect is that the standards for the employees will be raised. Requiring citizenship for a security job is a reasonable increase in job criteria standards, as would education, background checks, and so on. I wonder how many of the current employees will/would lose their jobs over these questions as well?
49 posted on 11/25/2001 2:40:15 AM PST by VietVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: TightSqueeze
"Am I the only one who sees a problem with 80% of airport security screners being other than US citizens? This fact alone is reason enough not to fly or even set foot in an airport. Does anyone think they could find another country where foreigners run 80% of anything?"

It goes like this'

"Good morning Muhammid. Please place your bag flat on the scanner."

"Allah akbar."

"All I see Muhammid is your boxcutter. But you are one of us. You are free to pass. Allah akbar."

50 posted on 11/25/2001 2:47:51 AM PST by NetValue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
That is a wonderful point.

The argument for federalizing these people in the first place was that this was for national security. democrats used the border patrol time and time again as an example. Well, the same argument should be used against any liberal idiot who says these people should keep their jobs, as I believe that one has to be a legal citizen to patrol our borders.

51 posted on 11/25/2001 3:04:11 AM PST by KC_Conspirator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: KC_Conspirator
This is insane! "I'm here illegally, but why should I lose my job?"
52 posted on 11/25/2001 3:13:14 AM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Nuke'm Glowing
Any idiot can see a gun in an X-ray picture

Really? Sure, if it's positioned in the bag horizontally so you see a recognizable outline of a gun.

But what if it's deliberately positioned so you just see the back view or top view? Then all you see is some rectangular shape.

Or how about if it's in the bag disassembled? Would you recognise the various pieces as adding up to a gun?

A competant screener is not an idiot. Unfortunately, the big question is: are the current crop of screeners competant?

Many, obviously are not. Last month a lady I work with got thru Philly AIrport security, and only when she got to the gate and looked thru her bag for something did she notice that she had forgotten some bullets in her bag

53 posted on 11/25/2001 3:28:28 AM PST by SauronOfMordor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SauronOfMordor
Welcome to the New Rome. Like the Roman Empire, America needs slaves.
54 posted on 11/25/2001 3:47:27 AM PST by gaspar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: TightSqueeze; Dutchy; RaceBannon
Am I the only one who sees a problem with 80% of airport security screners being other than US citizens

80% immediately caught my eye and I had to re-read it believing there was a typo.

55 posted on 11/25/2001 4:06:05 AM PST by StarFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: KQQL
Security screeners at San Francisco International Airport are upset that they could lose their jobs under a new federal law requiring them to gain U.S. citizenship, and the city's mayor has offered to intervene.

I am sick and tired of listening to this bunch of whinning, pathetic people. I could care less if they get upset about loosing their jobs. They can either play by our rules or they can go back where they came from - and don't let the door hit you in the butt on your way out.

56 posted on 11/25/2001 4:13:32 AM PST by Brownie74
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VietVet
By law, it takes 5 years to become a citizen.

Agreed. Many will not meet the statutory time requirement for citizenship. Others have the time, but haven't yet applied for naturalization. In either case they're hosed, since the time from initial application to the swearing-in ceremony is more like 12 months, if you're lucky.

And if there's one small consolation, its that they'll have to go through the FBI fingerprinting and background check as part of the naturalization procedure.

57 posted on 11/25/2001 4:35:44 AM PST by angkor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
What is your job situation as to skills, education? Where do you live and why do you live there?

I'm not sure where this is going . . . .

58 posted on 11/25/2001 1:52:18 PM PST by JoeSchem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson