Monday, March 17, 2014

You Sure You Want To Go Through With This?

APNewsBreak: Union says Los Angeles airport workers were poorly prepared to deal with shooting
A union report says thousands of workers at Los Angeles International Airport didn't know what to do when a gunman opened fire last year in a terminal.

The SEIU United Service Workers West report obtained Friday by The Associated Press says sky caps, wheelchair attendants and others weren't prepared for an evacuation and were hampered by poor communication.
Really? They were poorly prepared to deal with a workplace shooting? You *do* realize that workplace shootings aren't exactly a new thing, right? I distinctly remember the slew of post office shootings in the 1980s; I'm certain that they weren't the first in a line of workplace violence. Heck, Charles Whitman climbed the clocktower in 1966. It's rather hard to say that workplace violence is a new thing.

And in the "How Can A Union Help?" section, here's the number one function of a union, according to the SEIU:
# 1 - Working together, union members have the strength to win better wages, affordable health care, a secure retirement, and safer workplaces.
[emphasis mine]

Got that? The NUMBER ONE function of a union is to promote a safer workplace. Yet here's the SEIU claiming that union workers were unprepared on how to deal with a workplace shooter, despite decades of evidence that it could happen. And they're using this shooting to  agitate for more training now - but no one's asking why this wasn't a part of training already. Schools have been running scenarios since at least 1999 and Columbine. Yet no one has thought to train the workers at airports how to deal with workplace violence?

And wait just a minute. Wasn't there a shooting at LAX a few years ago? Oh, wait, yes there was. So, more than a decade before the most recent shooting, there was a shooting at the same airport, and yet no training program was put in place? No one from the union was agitating for a safer workplace through better training in 2002? Despite a previous shooting, there was no plan for evacuation or communication at the airport? I find that hard to believe.

Or is this simply the union clawing for some - any - semblance of relevance in the modern age?

That is all.

Another dispatch from...
(image courtesy of Robb Allen)

4 comments:

ProudHillbilly said...

They are gun free zones, therefore safe so why would they need such training?

Matthew said...

The University of Alaska is stating tat they will need a half-mil to do a study to figure out which parts of the campus will require extra security if Campus Carry passes.

I've been pointing out in the opinion pages that carry has been lawful in Alaska for 20 years and the Campus policy put in place at the same time has had no legal weight.

That being the case, I ask why have the Board of Regents not already long finished their security surveys? By claiming they need one now they are basically stating they have been either incompetent or negligent for two decades.

Old NFO said...

Same group that FOUGHT extra training about five years ago, not their job man!!!

Anonymous said...

Actually a safer workplace is #4.

After better wages (more money), affordable healthcare (more money), and secure retirement (more money). More money is #1, #2 and #3. More money is always #1, #2 and #3 in a union. Safety is an afterthought, tacked on at the end of their "Union Brotherhood" pitch.


If the union really cared, they'd run their own training program for their workers, like First Aid, etc. They'd be working with management, rather than grandstanding in a letter to the dues payers.