Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Background Check requirements will not go away.  (Read 9602 times)
KC8VWM
Member

Posts: 3121




Ignore
« Reply #105 on: May 24, 2007, 12:45:21 PM »

Needing hams is one thing. Having to put up with stubborn, egotistic people that think they deserve special treatment and that they should be exempt from the policies and procedures every other person in the agency has to adhere to is another matter.


-----

Yeah, taking measures to protect myself from identity theft (how silly of me) and the prying eyes of $5 dollar an hour cubicle workers employed at an outside LLC consulting agency who are performing checks on my personal financial information is somehow asking for "exemptions" or "special treatment"

It's plain risky and foolish to hand over your private information like that regardless of the reason or intention behind it.

Perhaps, a year or two from now when we read about how 1000's of Red Cross volunteers personal information was breached by a hacker on the evening news (that never happens does it?) then perhaps that will be when some people will start getting a clue.

But then again, that never happens does it. Really people who refuse to do the check are just being egotistical, stubborn instead of being legitimately concerned about protecting their personal information from getting into the wrong hands.

73 de Charles - KC8VWM
Logged
AC2Q
Member

Posts: 348




Ignore
« Reply #106 on: May 25, 2007, 04:26:05 AM »

If, as W3LK, Lon, alludes to, served agencies are turning to "LMR Equipment" and Such for thier EmComm needs, then WHAT is the point of this discussion??

According to Lon, who at least makes noises like someone who is rather high up in the ARC Heirarchy in Baltimore, the Baltimore Area has no need of EmComm Volunteeers. They have been replaced with a BOX that they Rent.

Hopefully they will be kind enough to lend it to Chicago and other major Cities, since this is the first I have heard of this Miracle Box.

KF8ZN

Logged
W3LK
Member

Posts: 5639




Ignore
« Reply #107 on: May 25, 2007, 05:30:41 AM »

<< If, as W3LK, Lon, alludes to, served agencies are turning to "LMR Equipment" and Such for thier EmComm needs, then WHAT is the point of this discussion?? >>

LMR  - Land Mobile Radio. This is commercial two-way equipment.

And I said public service events, not served agencies. Quit quoting me incorrectly. It's dishonest.

<<According to Lon, who at least makes noises like someone who is rather high up in the ARC Heirarchy in Baltimore,>>

Again, you don't bother to read. I have said on  more than one post that I HAVE NOT CONNECTION TO THE AMERICAN RED CROSS!!! The ARC is not the only national disaster response organization.

<< the Baltimore Area has no need of EmComm Volunteeers.>>

And I never said that, either!!! I said that many of the public event groups are renting commercial equipment because many times the hams can't or won't fulfill their commitments. You have really got to stop misquoting me!

<< They have been replaced with a BOX that they Rent. >>

In many cases, yes.

<<Hopefully they will be kind enough to lend it to Chicago and other major Cities, since this is the first I have heard of this Miracle Box. >>

Sir, your sarcasm is pathetic, your posts are solely for the purpose of continuing a baseless argument, and if you don't know what LMR is, then you are pretty ignorant of commercial communications equipment. There is a "whole 'nother world" of communications outside of amateur radio.

I have better thing to do than continue this pointless discussion.

73,

Lon - W3LK
Baltimore, Maryland
Logged

A smoking section in a restaurant makes as much sense as a peeing section in a swimming pool.
AC2Q
Member

Posts: 348




Ignore
« Reply #108 on: May 25, 2007, 07:41:53 AM »

I have better thing to do than continue this pointless discussion.

73,

Lon - W3LK
-------------------------------------------------------
Evidently Not
KF8ZN
Logged
FLAUXCOMBOB
Member

Posts: 40




Ignore
« Reply #109 on: June 09, 2007, 06:51:30 AM »

Well,  this has been a real exciting thread to read through!!

Lon,  you came into my thread and #@$^%^& splapped me across the face a few times for asking for help on my antenna.  Maybe I didn't ask the right questions but at least I didn't YELL AT PEOPLE in caps during my dialog. Maybe you could have been a little more circumspect and asked me more definitive questions reguard my problem as you seem to be the expert.

I appreciate the points you have made in this discussion and agree that if people don't want to have a background check, they should stay out of the field of operations!

I myself had to go through a 6 month background with Homeland Security as we are affiliated with the USCG.
I find it hard to believe that this check only required a credit check!! We can only go out on operations when we are qualified (by their standards), and have been notified of the need.

The thread was good but maybe it digressed a little?

73
FLBOB
AUXCOM
Logged
W3LK
Member

Posts: 5639




Ignore
« Reply #110 on: June 09, 2007, 08:37:38 AM »

Bob:

<<Lon, you came into my thread and #@$^%^& splapped me across the face a few times for asking for help on my antenna. >>

What? Sir, you are so full of it! I DID question your seriousness about your tower installation because what you propoised was unsafe, and several others told you the same thing! I also questioned your seriousness about the whole marine emergency assistance thing, based on your constant use of "lol" with every post and your attitude in general. I make no apology for anything I posted, but You, sir, owe me an apology for accusing me of things I did not do!

<<Maybe I didn't ask the right questions but at least I didn't YELL AT PEOPLE in caps during my dialog.>>

I did not yell at you a single time and to intimate that I did is dishonest, at the very least. I did emphasize the word safely in one post, though. If you consider this yelling you need to reexamine your own attitude. I do not appreciate you taking me to task here for a discussion in another fourm. That, too, is dishonest.

73,

Lon - W3LK
Baltimore, Maryland - soon to be Naugatuck, Connecticut
Logged

A smoking section in a restaurant makes as much sense as a peeing section in a swimming pool.
AC2Q
Member

Posts: 348




Ignore
« Reply #111 on: June 11, 2007, 10:15:58 AM »

It is obvious from reading W3LK's posts that he craves attention, and doesn't let a littel thing like lack of Substantive Reasoning get in the way of his unleashing a tirade

KF8ZN
Logged
K1LDS
Member

Posts: 20




Ignore
« Reply #112 on: July 04, 2007, 10:05:12 PM »

ZN, don't be a cynic.  Stack it up to his proximity to Foggy Bottom -- bureaucracy is contagious.

If Baltimore has all of the resources that they need, without us, then we should stay out of their way.  For that matter, we should stay out of the way until invited anyhow.

Unfortunately, the whole country is not like Baltimore.  When you get a state or two away from DC, you find wide areas with sparse resources, thus more need of volunteers (and less interest in the bureaucratic worldview).

I have no objection to criminal background checks.  I will not give blanket permission to anyone to use my financial information.  I guess that means I can't volunteer in Baltimore, but I will try to live with the pain that this causes me.

The issue is NOT what they HAVE done with that permission, the issue is that they WANT that permission.  For that matter, that it is the RED CROSS that wants that info (this is as ironic as hearing Hillary condemn presidential pardons)!

Keith K1LDS

Logged
KE4SKY
Member

Posts: 1045


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #113 on: September 11, 2007, 08:04:46 AM »

By Glen H. Sage, W4GHS
ARRL Virginia Section Manager
 
Work continues to progress on the Virginia Section Emergency Communications Plan. Henry Wyatt, K4YCR our SEC is serving as editor on the project as
different section cabinet members are working on various portions of the manual. This document will serve as both a field manual and reference tool
by the NTS within Virginia as well as Amateur Radio Emergency Service. This doesn't eliminate the need for local emergency communications plans and ECs
are encouraged to continue to develop and refine their local plans. This will llow local ARES units to better understand how they can incorporate the
district and section in mutual support for their local ARES unit.
 
We will be making contact with persons who have completed ARECC level one and have expressed an interest in serving on an Emergency Response Team (ERT). Only those who have registered with ARES at the section level will be contacted. There will be other qualifications for these teams consistent with the recommendations of the National Emergency Response Planning Committee (NERPC). These include the following minimum standards:

-- ARRL's ARECC Level 1
-- Red Cross combined course in Adult CPR/First Aid Basics
-- Red Cross online Introduction to Disaster Services [www.redcross.org/flash/course01_v01/]
-- FEMA IS-100 (Introduction to Incident Command System)
-- FEMA IS-200 (ICS for Single Resource and Initial Action Incidents)
-- FEMA IS-700 (National Incident Management System)

We will be requiring a criminal background check to ensure that the members do not have a felony conviction as part of their history. This is a requirement in many areas now.
 
Aside from the ARECC level 1 training we will phase in the other course requirements to allow team members time to achieve the other qualifications
by July of 2008.
 
Our ASM Dan Edwards continues to work on programming of an interactive Virginia Section Registrations form. This will allow ARES members and all section appointees to view and update their files as changes are made in the contact information as well as personal or station capabilities. Your information will be password protected.

Logged
AC2Q
Member

Posts: 348




Ignore
« Reply #114 on: September 18, 2007, 09:17:07 AM »

KE4SKY Writes:............We will be requiring a criminal background check to ensure that the members do not have a felony conviction as part of their history. This is a requirement in many areas now............

This thread is a far cry from the Original Issue, that of ARC Background Checks through a non-secure 3rd party Vendor.


I think this is pretty much a DEAD ISSUE as regards ARES at least, reference the following excerpt:

** ARRL Letter Vol. 26, No. 30 July 27,2007 **

The Board adopted a policy that "communications volunteers participating in ARRL-sponsored programs should not be required by served agencies to undergo background investigations of any kind," but notes that criminal background checks--performed by law enforcement agencies--are "generally acceptable." The policy continues, "It is not reasonable for a served agency to require these volunteers to consent to credit checks, mode of living investigations or investigative consumer reports. In negotiating or renegotiating Memoranda of Understanding that commit the League to provide volunteer emergency communications support, the League must be assured that these volunteers will not be required by the partner organization to consent to credit checks, mode of living investigations or investigative consumer reports."
Logged
K2GW
Member

Posts: 535


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #115 on: November 10, 2007, 07:31:27 AM »

>>I think this is pretty much a DEAD ISSUE as regards ARES at least, reference the following excerpt:

That may be the ARRL board's position, but we'll see whether the Red Cross actually changes THEIR position when the Memorandum of Understanding with the ARRL is renegotiated. I doubt it, unless you truly believe the tail wags the dog.

Based on the discussions at the forums at Dayton, the Red Cross position is that because of Congressional scutiny post Katrina, they are required to have background checks done and they don't want to bother having to keep track in the midst of a disaster which volunteer had which type of background check. My own feeling is that the Red Cross will stick to their position and tell the ARRL to accept it as part of a new MOU or see the Red Cross use of ARRL's volunteer communicators drop off precipitiously.

Red Cross might then use more of it's own non-ARES hams who have passed the checks to perform their comms functions, just as Salvation Army uses its own hams who have passed their background check policy in SATERN. This "Balkanisation" of the Amatuer Radio EmComm response is not desirable in my opinion as it leads to turf wars, duplication of efforts and inefficient allocation of scarce Amateur Radio EmComm resources.

So I wouldn't call it a dead issue yet, not until a new MOU bewtween Red Cross and ARRL is signed.

73

Gary, K2GW

Logged
AC2Q
Member

Posts: 348




Ignore
« Reply #116 on: November 16, 2007, 07:21:14 AM »

K2GW writes:
Red Cross might then use more of it's own non-ARES hams who have passed the checks to perform their comms functions, just as Salvation Army uses its own hams who have passed their background check policy in SATERN. This "Balkanisation" of the Amatuer Radio EmComm response is not desirable in my opinion as it leads to turf wars, duplication of efforts and inefficient allocation of scarce Amateur Radio EmComm resources.

So I wouldn't call it a dead issue yet, not until a new MOU bewtween Red Cross and ARRL is signed.

---------------------------------------------------
I didn't see in his post when this will be completed, but I will be glad to hear whatever the results are.

My opinion has not changed, but it will be nice to know which way to go, and if the ARC can staff thier needs internally, then it proves they do not need ARES once and for all.
Logged
N1JIN
Member

Posts: 4




Ignore
« Reply #117 on: July 30, 2008, 11:38:38 AM »

The "box" is a service from Cisco called the NERV it has a satellite link and one of the IC-1000's.

On the ARC's policy on background checks

Criminal - Ok
Credit by random LLC not ok

IF the ARC directly checked the bureau's not a problem as if my information leaked it would be the ARC's responsibility to remediate but having a random dot.com check and hold financial information for sale to the highest bidder then I think I will just pass and concentrate on MARS instead.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!