Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?  (Read 18958 times)

AC2Q

  • Member
  • Posts: 394
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #30 on: April 02, 2008, 06:58:35 AM »

Well Gary, it all comes down to taking a stand on Principle. If I were to stop along the road to aid a motorist with a flat tire, and they asked to see my ID, I would get back in my car and drive away.

The same logic and principle applies to refusing to succumb to a background check for a VOLUNTEER position.

Your argument boils down to "everbodys doing it"

My Mom had a saying involving "If everyone was jumping off a bridge?"
Logged

K2GW

  • Member
  • Posts: 538
    • homeURL
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #31 on: April 02, 2008, 07:49:46 AM »

>>Your argument boils down to "everbodys doing it" .

No, my argument can be found in the most important principle found in the very first chapter of the ARRL Emergency Communications Manual.  It says that we're here to meet the needs of our served agencies.  Our served agencies needs now include our completing simple background checks.  Since we haven't established our own nationwide background check system, we have to use theirs for now.

And if we're not able to meet our served agencies needs, then there's not much of a future for us in Disaster Response.

73,

Gary, K2GW


Logged

AC2Q

  • Member
  • Posts: 394
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #32 on: April 02, 2008, 08:27:19 AM »

K2GW writes:
Our served agencies needs now include our completing simple background checks. Since we haven't established our own nationwide background check system, we have to use theirs for now.

-----------------------------------------------------

You state "need"

I reply "unnecessary invasion of privacy"

Logged

AJ4DW

  • Member
  • Posts: 148
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #33 on: April 02, 2008, 08:47:54 AM »

I question whether the security checks have been of any benefit whatsoever. Thus I don't agree that, as a principle, one of the sacrifices we must make as volunteers is our personal freedom.

However, as Gary has said, the background checks are really not up to the served agancies, as the checks are mandated by Congress. Our beef is with Congress and the present administration.

I do find it hard to believe that an NGO will refuse help from a federally licensed radio operator during a time of need because they have no security check... but that's yet to be seen. We really don't have to be "Red Cross Volunteers" per se to help out during an emergency. Just like with ARES: I may have one or two dozen card-carrying ARES members, but if it hits the fan I know I will have a lot more licensed help show up when I need them (one of the nice things about amateur radio, we -as a group- really do care). I leave it up to each individual to make his or her own decision...

73 de Carl AJ4DW


"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Logged

W3LK

  • Member
  • Posts: 5639
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #34 on: April 02, 2008, 10:53:16 AM »

I had vowed to stay out of this, yet another beating of  dead horse by KF8ZN, but I decided to make a couple of comments from the served agency perspective.

<< I do find it hard to believe that an NGO will refuse help from a federally licensed radio operator during a time of need because they have no security check... >>

If you walk into my agency and want to work as an on-site volunteer in a disaster area, you will either (1) bring proof of having passed criminal background check, or (2) submit to one at that time. If you choose to do neither, you will be told, "Thank You, but we can't use you on any of our disaster relief sites". It's that simple.

Mike: you can rant and puff out your chest and wave your paranoia flag all you want, but it will change nothing. The volunteers do NOT dictate policy to the agencies they serve. If you don't like the policy, stay home. It's that simple.

I have a news flash for some of you folks: served agencies are looking to other communications means to replace amateur radio, especially for large scale disasters.

After spending the last ten years as an Emergency Disaster Services Director, helping to direct deliver of my agency's services in Katrina, Rita, Isabel, the four Florida hurricanes of 2004, and more others than I can remember, I can very easily live without hams (or any other volunteer) who don't want to work within my agency's policies and procedures.

73,

Lon - W3LK
Naugatuck, Connecticut
Logged
A smoking section in a restaurant makes as much sense as a peeing section in a swimming pool.

W3LK

  • Member
  • Posts: 5639
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #35 on: April 02, 2008, 11:34:11 AM »

<< I question whether the security checks have been of any benefit whatsoever.>>

With all due respect, people who make a statement like this do not work in the disaster response (or any other human services delivery) field on a regular basis. The criminal background checks are a screening tool to keep criminals away from clients and staff and they DO work to that end.

If you had to deal with the discovery that one of the folks working in  your shelter had one or more convictions for sex abuse or assault and had assaulted a client or staff member, you'd change your feeling very quickly. The liability issues are enormous!

The issue for the served agencies is not terror threats or or loyality issues, it's the protection of the safety and well being of the clients and disaster victims the agency is servicing, as well as the agency's staff.

73,

Lon - W3LK
Naugatuck, Connecticut
Logged
A smoking section in a restaurant makes as much sense as a peeing section in a swimming pool.

AJ4DW

  • Member
  • Posts: 148
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #36 on: April 02, 2008, 11:47:04 AM »

Lon;

I expected that any agency worth it's salt would look to alternative means of communications. I'm not put off or threatened by that fact, as a primary source of firsthand communication and information (telephone, fax, whatever) is always preferable to the back-up that ham radio provides. And we ARE back-up... as the motto goes "When all else fails". If all else hasn't failed then we're usually not needed. I will not cry, my soul will not shrivel up if someone says "We're doing OK, we don't need you right now".

When you're in your shelter and the power is out and you have no other means of communications you're not going to be able to do a background check. If you're bleeding out from a compound fracture and I reach for my medical bag (I'm an MD) are you going to ask for my security clearance first? I hope that my Highway Patrol ID and badge will do. If I was you I wouldn't exercise my power so absolutely and be so inflexible. It does make you sound manly and strong to be able to state absolutes here, but in an emergency there are no absolutes. We're all folks trying to do our best during an emergency and it's best to try to work together. If we object to background checks, then we object... I think that the way the whole thing was handled stinks (if it was handled better there wouldn't have been a stink, but it seems that the ARC wasn't really concerned that people understand why they needed what they needed). I can understand why the agencies have to perform background checks. I hope you can understand the principles behind people objecting to them. Let's hope when the chips are down we can work together as well as possible.
Logged

AC2Q

  • Member
  • Posts: 394
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #37 on: April 02, 2008, 11:55:47 AM »

W3LK writes:
Mike: you can rant and puff out your chest and wave your paranoia flag all you want, but it will change nothing. The volunteers do NOT dictate policy to the agencies they serve. If you don't like the policy, stay home. It's that simple.

I have a news flash for some of you folks: served agencies are looking to other communications means to replace amateur radio, especially for large scale disasters.
--------------------------------------------------

Lon Lon Lon,

How would you know if I am puffing out my chest =0)

I have been polite, to the point, and CIVIL, and then there is you.................

You misunderstand completely, yet again, I don't care if I can change policy or not, and I hope to encourage EVERYONE to "stay home" rather than submit to a growing heaping of ludicrous BS requirements.

If "served agencies are looking to other communications means to replace amateur radio", that is FANTASTIC, and I wish them well, but the historical track record of the US Governement doing anything well is not very good.

My frustration stems NOT from the fact that I am dieing to be in "your club", but from the fact that the system is an ever increasing descent into meaningless bureaucracy, rather than FOCUSING ON THE MISSION.


1) I will not submit to a background check, if that means I am excluded, I do not care.

2) If served agencies can complete their mission without Amateur Radio, I wish them well.

Lastly, I find it telling that you resort to tactics of trying to ridicule my position with phrases like "paranoia flag". I have made no mention whatsoever that I beleive any information I might provide will be mis-used. It's not about paranoia, it's about PRINCIPLE.

So try another tack, OM, because you still don't get it.


Logged

AJ4DW

  • Member
  • Posts: 148
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #38 on: April 02, 2008, 12:00:34 PM »

You might also remember that the part of the background checks that folks objected to was the "lifestyles and financial information", not the criminal background checks. I don't think that you can defend those aspects of a check.

Criminal checks are a good idea, Major. That's not what most of us were addressing. It seems that the ARC never explained exactly what was going on with the checks as well as Gary did... they didn't care to. And, yes, I do know about criminals. Perhaps we should all calm down a bit and work on cooperating. I'll be happy to undergo a criminal background check (I do every time I purchase a weapon in this state). But I'll continue to object to checks into my "lifestyle" and financial records.


Carl MD, MPH, FACPM - AJ4DW
Former:
Major (O-4) US Army
Chief Patrol Surgeon, SC Highway Patrol
Consultant, South Carolina Law Enforcement Division
Logged

AC2Q

  • Member
  • Posts: 394
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #39 on: April 02, 2008, 12:02:47 PM »

Additionally, Dear Sweet Lon,

Is the ARRL "waving the paranoia flag" also???

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,"
Logged

K2GW

  • Member
  • Posts: 538
    • homeURL
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #40 on: April 02, 2008, 12:16:17 PM »

>>I can very easily live without hams (or any other volunteer) who don't want to work within my agency's policies and procedures.

Exactly, Lon, and you shouldn't have to.  

And I, as an SEC, won't send hams with that kind of attitude to any served agency.  Maintaining a good working relationship with the served agencies is a major part of my ARRL job description.  Finding a place for hams who only want to play by their own rules is a much lower priority, when I have other hams available who truly understand the concept of "service" to a served agency.

If anyone has any doubts about the importance of a cooperative attitude on the part of an EmComm ham, I suggest they reread the ARRL Emergency Communications Manual or the ARECC Level 1 course materials.

So as I said in my very first post in this thread, hams don't have to submit to any background check (even one as minimal and benign as the Red Cross's), but they shouldn't then be suprised if the opportunities for their participation in EmComm become increasingly limited as more and more agencies require background checks.

I will be extremely suprised to see the Red Cross ever waive something Congress has asked them to do just to accomodate an MOU with ARRL.  Even the ARRL Board Report on EmComm doesn't forsee that, but hopes for a standard federal background check so the league won't have to pay to implement it's own.  But it's still going to be someone's background check.

That's simply the facts of life in 2008.

73

Gary, K2GW
Logged

W3LK

  • Member
  • Posts: 5639
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #41 on: April 02, 2008, 02:09:53 PM »

I knew I shouldn't have bothered posting anything. This horse has been beat to death so many times, but a few keep trying to bring it back to life for no other reason that starting arguments and seeing themselves in print.

Good Bye.

73,

Lon - W3LK
Naugatuck, Connecticut
Logged
A smoking section in a restaurant makes as much sense as a peeing section in a swimming pool.

AJ4DW

  • Member
  • Posts: 148
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #42 on: April 02, 2008, 03:07:25 PM »

"Respice post te! Hominem te esse memento!" (We're only human).

Criminal check good, financial check NOYB. A volunteer organization which does not respect its volunteers will soon cease to exist, that's what I taught when I taught Public Health and Preventive Medicine... Amateur radio does fine without engaging in EmComm and it will continue to do so (many hams even refuse to participate in EmComm at all).
Logged

AC2Q

  • Member
  • Posts: 394
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #43 on: April 02, 2008, 03:18:53 PM »

W3LK writes: I knew I shouldn't have bothered posting anything. This horse has been beat to death so many times, but a few keep trying to bring it back to life for no other reason that starting arguments and seeing themselves in print.

Good Bye.

73,

Lon - W3LK
---------------------------------------------------
Lon,
Nobody challenged you to post here, and I would submit that this "dead horse" is the hottest topic in this forum, so it evidently requires more beating =0)

I think you are frustrated because your argument is indefensible.

If you are used to talking to Sheeple who accept your every word as gospel, you are too thin skinned to be happy here.

Logged

K2GW

  • Member
  • Posts: 538
    • homeURL
ARC/ARRL MOU UPDATE?
« Reply #44 on: April 02, 2008, 04:33:21 PM »

>>Criminal check good, financial check NOYB

Great! Looks like we're all finally in agreement. Sign up and complete the Red Cross background check today which is just a criminal background check if you're a ham.

As has been stated here THREE times already (and a call to your local Red Cross chapter will prove it), no one is paying for or doing a financial check on hams, unless you're a Red Cross volunteer doing "case work" (issuing vouchers to victims) and just happen to be a ham as well.

73

Gary, K2GW
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up