Practical Travel Safety Issues - Help! - Rochester (ROC) NY's Contract Guards saw my Online TSA Complaint & Retaliated

This is a plea for assistance with filing complaints about the retaliation I suffered this morning in Rochester (ROC), NY. Thank you in advance for limiting responses to PRACTICAL advice.

Here is what happened: I opted out of the nude-o-scope, was cleared, then proceeded to a vacant gate that was not being used for boarding. As I was sitting at this vacant gate, I opened up my laptop and began filling out an online TSA Complaint form. I believe that my screen was clearly visible to others because that was what I intended - I was sitting on the end of the aisle and I had my browser set to a large font with the screen brightness cranked way up.

(I also personally think having other passengers see that we are unafraid to complain about TSA while still inside an airport is the most effective protest mechanism we have.)

As I was finishing filling out the TSA Complaint form, a group of ROC's contract security guards approached me and informed me that I had been selected for random gate screening. I quickly clicked "submit", closed my laptop (locking it), and replied that I was not at an active gate, nor was I attempting to board a plane, and so I declined. The lead security guard replied that it was not a random search. (Yes, I did correctly hear that -- I was actually stunned that he actually stated that it was not a random search.)

As (1) we were not at a checkpoint, (2) not in view of any visible security cameras and (3) these contract guards were acting more like goons than the professional federal employees wearing TSA uniforms I encounter at most TSA checkpoints, I got up and went to the nearest open gate agent. (It was not my my flight, but it had finished boarding and was waiting for its departure time, so I figured the GA was best able to deal with me.) I requested that the GA call an Airline supervisor; I think the contract guards told her to call the LEOs before I was able to. I then waited at the GA's desk for the LEOs to arrive.

I was eventually detained by two LEOs, at least five uniformed contract guards, a plainclothes TSA supervisor and an Airline supervisor.

The LEOs and contract guards were all white males, except for one contract guard who was non-white person involved and was also very large -- think of an American football linebacker and you will get an idea of his build. They had him go through my rollerboard. I think this was an attempt to intimidate me, but he reminded me of a very close friend, so I was actually more comfortable with him than any of the others. (I was also struck by how it was so WNY-like to make the one non-white guy be the one who had to dig thru soiled laundry -- before anyone attacks me for that observation, you should know that I used to be a WNYer.)

The rest of the experience was like others have reported on FT - they had the LEOs confiscate my drivers license, ran some sort of background check on me, and refused to answer any questions about their privacy and data retention policies.

As I talked with them, the LEOs repeatedly told me incorrect statements about TSA procedures and tried to blame it all on me. Worst of all, when when I asked them, the two LEOs confirmed their belief that the contract guards had the right to stop any passenger for a non-random (targeted) search anywhere in the airport.

My understanding is that ROC's contract guards are neither sworn law enforcement officers, nor federal employees. (Presumably, federal employees and sworn LEOs are encumbered by the Constitution.) If I were an attractive woman and/or celebrity, I would be pretty terrified to know that ROC's LEOs think that ROC's male contract guards can stop and perform non-random searches anywhere around the airport.

The plainclothed TSA supervisor and Airline supervisor repeatedly conferred with one another, apparently to ensure that I was not released until after my flight boarded. Once they confirmed the flight was closed, the two LEOs walked me the 50 feet to the gate I was supposed to depart from. They waited there as the GA explained that my flight had closed "30 seconds" ago and began rebooking me.

The LEOs remained at the gate until I had been rebooked, presumably so that they would know my next flight and come back and harass me some more. I opened up my laptop to the still-open TSA Complaint Webpage and showed it to them and again tried telling the LEOs that the contract guards had misled them.

I then bid goodbye to the LEOs by indicating that I expected to see them again in the afternoon. I then sat and watched my "missed" flight remain connected to the gate for 10 minutes, before the gate was moved away and the plane pushed back. (I am sure the airline appreciated having TSA open up a seat on an overbooked Monday AM flight for them.)

So I now have the rest of my morning free. I have already filed these complaints so far:

TSA Online form, complaining about Opt-Out Process (filed as the contract guards showed up for their non-random, non-gate search)
TSA Online Form, complaining about the retaliation
Senior Senator from my home state
Junior Senator from my home state
Senior Senator from ROC's state -- he will probably like the complaint because he seems to prefer that screeners be unionized federal employees
Junior Senator from ROC's state
Congresswoman for ROC's district
Airline (about GA assisting with TSA's retaliation)


I am also working on a full discrimination complaint to TSA, but I will probably not send that until I am home -- I have never needed to do one of those before.

I also need to figure out how to file complaints against the two local LEOs. I anticipate contacting their employing agency -- they took my employment information after all and the golden rule says to do unto others as they have done unto you. :) Are there any LEO-certifying bodies that I should also complain to? I am very disturbed to know that they think contract guards can perform non-random searches anywhere on airport property.

Any suggestions on what else to do? Are the contract security guards licensed and/or certified by the state or other agency?

[PS I did mean it when I used the phrase "professional federal employees wearing TSA uniforms". DHS is incredibly screwed up, but most individual TSA employees I encounter are doing their best with what they have to work with.]

Complain to the Rochester NY police department:
www.cityofrochester.gov/rpdcomplaintprocess/

Complain to the Rochester NY police department:
www.cityofrochester.gov/rpdcomplaintprocess/

Awesome and thank you so much. It did not occur to me to complain to the city police.

I neglected to mention that the contract guards that searched my luggage flipped through all my reading material. On the top of the pile was a hard copy of the article "The scientific jigsaw puzzle: Fitting the pieces of the low-level radiation debate" that recently appeared in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

Complain to the Rochester NY police department:
www.cityofrochester.gov/rpdcomplaintprocess/

The ROC airport uses the Monroe County Sheriffs,not RPD. I know who the large TSO you are referring to. He and another one were testing passengers in the gate area's drinks prior to boarding.That guy is huge !

I'm sorry the TSA treated you so badly in ROC. I hate flying out of there because the TSA so rude there . I never had a problem at any other airport (MIA,ATL,BWI)I was departing from .

ps,Good luck getting any kind response from the Sheriffs.

Complain to the Rochester NY police department:
www.cityofrochester.gov/rpdcomplaintprocess/

I believe ROC is under the jurisdiction of the Monroe county sheriff's office, not the rochester police. It may be more helpful to a file a complain with them ( http://www.monroecounty.gov/sheriff-about ). Also consider a complain with McNeil the company that does screen in ROC ( http://www.mcneilsecurity.com/ )

I believe ROC is under the jurisdiction of the Monroe county sheriff's office, not the rochester police. It may be more helpful to a file a complain with them ( http://www.monroecounty.gov/sheriff-about ). Also consider a complain with McNeil the company that does screen in ROC ( http://www.mcneilsecurity.com/ )

Welcome to FT iamflyer, and thank you so much for the links!

I'll be that guy. They clearly singled you out for a reason. Not that I'm justifying it, but what happened at the checkpoint before you started writing your complaint?

I'll be that guy. They clearly singled you out for a reason. Not that I'm justifying it, but what happened at the checkpoint before you started writing your complaint?

I was going to say the same thing. Again - none of what happened is justified, but why would you go out of your way to make sure that they saw you filing a complaint?

I'll be that guy. They clearly singled you out for a reason. Not that I'm justifying it, but what happened at the checkpoint before you started writing your complaint?

Good question.

I opted out and was assertive (not submissive) during the process -- I pointed out that I needed to be able to keep my belongings in site during the process, etc. After the contract guard did the pat down, he cleared me and began to make small talk, about why I was traveling, but I chose to ignore him and continued to repack my belongings. (Being a FT regular, I know that I have the right to remain silent, so when I did not feel like engaging in small talk, I just remained silent.) He then made a smart ... comment (to me) like "Oh, so you're not going to answer".

This guard, the one who performed the patdown, was the same one who informed me that I was being selected for the non random search.

I'll be that guy. They clearly singled you out for a reason. Not that I'm justifying it, but what happened at the checkpoint before you started writing your complaint?

?? Why? What does it matter what happened at the checkpoint? What possible reason could you imagine to justify the OP being singled out for retaliatory actions at the gate? It looks to me like you're looking for a reason to say "OP acted like a jerk at the checkpoint and brought it all on himself". (Even if this were true, is TSA so over-resourced and unprofessional that it has time to spare from airline security to focus on retaliatory actions? The resources devoted to harassing the OP at the gate are resources that were wasting my taxpayer dollars and not making me safer as a pax).

If he was allowed to clear the checkpoint, then he had been properly cleared into the sterile area and should have been free from further harassment (other than perhaps a totally useless 'random' gate search, which this clearly was not).

This isn't the first recent example of this kind of punitive follow-up. Read up about the doctor, wife and young girl with cerebral palsy (IIRC) - crutches, mentally handicapped - who were cleared at the checkpoint, by a TSA supervisor, no less, but later challenged at the gate and required to return to the checkpoint for a further screening that caused them to miss their flight.

[QUOTE=LOCommish;18529646 but why would you go out of your way to make sure that they saw you filing a complaint?[/QUOTE]

I was filing out the complaint at a gate area, not near the checkpoint. I did not realize it at the time, but the uniformed guards followed me out of the checkpoint area.

Let me be clear that I did not flee -- I was cleared to leave, I repacked my belongings, and slowly strolled away. I even stopped and doublechecked the departure board.

I was probably at the vacant gate for 15 or 20 minutes before they showed up to research me. (I had written a long complaint before they arrived.)

We are landing, so I won't be following up again until I get caught up at the office.

Here is what happened: I opted out of the nude-o-scope, was cleared, then proceeded to a vacant gate that was not being used for boarding. As I was sitting at this vacant gate, I opened up my laptop and began filling out an online TSA Complaint form. I believe that my screen was clearly visible to others because that was what I intended - I was sitting on the end of the aisle and I had my browser set to a large font with the screen brightness cranked way up.


Of course you're entitled to file a complaint and it shouldn't result in retaliation. But I don't understand why you'd do it in such an obvious manner - other than to aggravate the agents. Again - does NOT justify what went on after that but ...

I'm really not sure what the color of the agents skin had to do with it, but that's for another forum.

Why did they follow you? You say they did all this because you were filling out a complaint form, but that was after they followed you, unless you started the complaint at the checkpoint. So the entire premise this was over a complaint form to me is not valid, they were already following you.

It's a bit of a stretch for me to believe that three uniformed guards randomly followed you for no valid reason, and then did a search once they saw your online complaint form.

As this is, in my reading, a violation of your civil liberties, I would also contact the Genesee Valley chapter of the NYCLU. I don't know what will happen, but I have certainly seen first hand that the ACLU as an organization does care very greatly about civil liberty violations in airports.

http://www.nyclu.org/regions/genesee-valley/getting-legal-assistance-0

I would suggest seeking out sympathetic news reporter(s) that can get this not only in the blogosphere but also the MSM.

Perhaps the TSA can find a way to try and justify the retaliatory search (outside of the view of the checkpoint cameras, mind you, so there's little/no evidence), but they cannot justify the very deliberate intent to make you miss your flight. That, in and of itself, is newsworthy.

?? Why? What does it matter what happened at the checkpoint? What possible reason could you imagine to justify the OP being singled out for retaliatory actions at the gate? It looks to me like you're looking for a reason to say "OP acted like a jerk at the checkpoint and brought it all on himself".

Context. As I wrote before, I wasn't suggesting it was justified, but that there is obviously more to the story than just, "I was sitting around minding my own business when a bunch of security guys grabbed me for a secondary (tertiary?) inspection at the gate."

The fact that the OP responded that the guy who patted him down was the same one who pulled him aside at the gate actually bolsters the OP's position, imo.

This is a plea for assistance with filing complaints about the retaliation I suffered this morning in Rochester (ROC), NY. Thank you in advance for limiting responses to PRACTICAL advice.Sounds like you also have a claim for IDB since you fulfilled the terms of the CoC, had cleared the checkpoint and were in the gate area, but were being detained by LEO's with the knowledge of the airline supervisor.

It is one thing to detain a passenger at a checkpoint in order to make him miss his flight. It is quite another to do it post-checkpoint without probable cause.

I am incredibly thankful for all the follow-ups, especially the skeptical posts - the skeptics are making my complaint even better.

Context. As I wrote before, I wasn't suggesting it was justified, but that there is obviously more to the story than just, "I was sitting around minding my own business when a bunch of security guys grabbed me for a secondary (tertiary?) inspection at the gate."

The fact that the OP responded that the guy who patted him down was the same one who pulled him aside at the gate actually bolsters the OP's position, imo.

Thanks for this, gobluetwo. I have reviewed my notes and the complaints I submitted online. Based upon the times I documented in my notes and when the online complaints were submitted, it appears that the contract guards showed up in the gate area about the time boarding was beginning.

However, I note that the contract guards:

(1) Did not attempt to screen anyone else, all morning long!
(2) Failed to setup the usual tables adjacent to at a boarding gate.
(3) Singled me out and stated to my face that it was not a random search.
(4) Failed to recheck my body.

In other airports, I have observed random gate searches performed in accordance with TSA procedures - the TSA will station uniformed officers at the gate where the boarding is happening, randomly pull boarding passengers out of the queue, and have tables to hold the luggage being gated-screened. The contract guards at ROC did none of that.

The fact that I had my laptop open to a TSA complaint screen is probably just a bonus.

Any pointers to more thorough descriptions of correct gate screening procedures would be greatly appreciated.

Sounds like you also have a claim for IDB since you fulfilled the terms of the CoC, had cleared the checkpoint and were in the gate area, but were being detained by LEO's with the knowledge of the airline supervisor.

Awesome observation, ND Sol! I had not thought about an IDB claim. I will add that to my to-do list.

Why did they follow you? You say they did all this because you were filling out a complaint form, but that was after they followed you, unless you started the complaint at the checkpoint. So the entire premise this was over a complaint form to me is not valid, they were already following you.

Thank you for your observation, cordelli!

I have retraced my morning, to ensure I had my facts correct. My gas receipt shows that I filled my rental car up at 4:47 AM, at the Mobil on Brooks Ave. I then drove approximately 1 mile to the car drop off location, which is in the airport's parking deck. I already had the return paperwork in the car, so I filled in the mileage and time, walked inside, dropped the keys and form into the dropbox, then proceeded directly upstairs to the security line. I had preprinted my boarding pass the night before, so I can place myself in the security line at 5 AM.

The screening process went reasonably quickly; neither complaint I submitted to TSA mentioned slow screening. My first complaint also says that I cleared the checkpoint at about 5:20 AM.

I then submitted my first online complaint to TSA at 5:42 AM, according to the confirmation email I received from TSA, which is when the contract guards retaliated against me. Consequently, there is a 15 to 25 minute period when I was alone at the unattended gate, working on my laptop.

The 5:42 AM mark would have been about the appropriate time for contract guards to show up at a gate area for random gate checks. So, thanks to your observation corelli, I can conclude that they either followed me, or waited until gate check time, and then singled me out.

Awesome observation, ND Sol! I had not thought about an IDB claim. I will add that to my to-do list.
IDB is plain silly. If anybody actually reads the DOT rule on IDB, they will see that it only applies if the aircraft is oversold. Doing this would make OP a laughingstock.

Like I said,good luck getting any type of response from th MCSO. I dont understand how going through your stuff again at the gate would make things any better for your complaint.

IDB is plain silly. If anybody actually reads the DOT rule on IDB, they will see that it only applies if the aircraft is oversold. Doing this would make OP a laughingstock.

(bolding mine)
Well, I haven't read the DOT rule, but I had a gate agent tell me that IDB also applied to pax off-loaded because of weight issues (overall flight weight, not pax size), assuming the plane was of a certain size. The flight went out with empty seats. Perhaps she was wrong?

(bolding mine)
Well, I haven't read the DOT rule, but I had a gate agent tell me that IDB also applied to pax off-loaded because of weight issues (overall flight weight, not pax size), assuming the plane was of a certain size. The flight went out with empty seats. Perhaps she was wrong?
Either the GA was wrong or you misheard. Not only does the DOT rule apply by its own terms to "oversold" only, but there is a specific exclusion for smaller aircraft weight & balance issues. In other words, on one of those 50-seaters, if weight & balance means the aircraft can only fly with 44 pax and you are one of the unlucky 6, you gets $0.

More importantly, weight & balance has nothing to do with what TSA did or did not do with respect to OP. The air carrier owes OP nothing because it didn't deny OP boarding for any reason.

Either the GA was wrong or you misheard. Not only does the DOT rule apply by its own terms to "oversold" only, but there is a specific exclusion for smaller aircraft weight & balance issues. In other words, on one of those 50-seaters, if weight & balance means the aircraft can only fly with 44 pax and you are one of the unlucky 6, you gets $0.

More importantly, weight & balance has nothing to do with what TSA did or did not do with respect to OP. The air carrier owes OP nothing because it didn't deny OP boarding for any reason.

I posted what I did because you indicated that IDB applied only to oversell situations. I referenced an IDB incident that did not involve an oversell situation and pointed out the agent's reference to plane size. I don't know exactly how many seats the plane had, but it was certainly more than 50, it went out with empty seats because of 'weight' issues, and those of us who were denied boarding were issued IDB compensation. Apparently the gate agent owed us nothing and acted against DOT rules, but it was much more involved than an off-hand remark.

Either the GA was wrong or you misheard. Not only does the DOT rule apply by its own terms to "oversold" only, but there is a specific exclusion for smaller aircraft weight & balance issues. In other words, on one of those 50-seaters, if weight & balance means the aircraft can only fly with 44 pax and you are one of the unlucky 6, you gets $0.

More importantly, weight & balance has nothing to do with what TSA did or did not do with respect to OP. The air carrier owes OP nothing because it didn't deny OP boarding for any reason.Perhaps you missed this from the OP: "(I am sure the airline appreciated having TSA open up a seat on an overbooked Monday AM flight for them.)" So it did become an IDB even in the technical sense.

Gate screening is a different animal than the checkpoint screening. First, you have submitted to all requirements in a timely manner. Second, by analogy the TSA says you have the right to new gloves and private screening at the gate. Unless this is a Hobson's choice, if the airline decides to depart without you due to your legal request, at a minimum IDB compensation should trigger. The TSA has the authority to stop airplanes from leaving (e.g. terminal dumps). As such, all the TSA would say is that screening of the passengers and the aircraft has not been completed, so the airplane is not permitted to depart. There were three parties involved in this matter: the airline, the TSA and the passenger. Of the three, the one to suffer is not the passenger.

What I am curious about is the OP's reason for the first complaint.

So the questions are: What prompted the first complaint? What prompted the TSA agent to "follow" you or have cause for concern? (Not saying there was any cause - just playing devil's advocate) From what I read it seemed to be about the opt out process.

Which concourse were you in? Just curious.

There are Sheriff's Deputies stationed just to the left before you exit security. They are employed by the Monroe County Sheriff's Department. I am not sure what justification there would be for a complaint against them.

Security Officers are licensed by NYS.

It is my understanding that once inside the secured area of an airport, one can be approached and questioned by authorized personnel on a random or non-random basis; the later being on reasonable cause. Authorized personnel being the key phrase and I would anticipate that the "contract guards" were acting in accordance to their duties; once of which may be assisting a TSA agent.

Maybe the original screener was a BDO and your not conversing with him/her was enough in their mind to warrant further investigation which set off the turn of events.

I hope it gets resolve to your satisfaction.

It is my understanding that once inside the secured area of an airport, one can be approached and questioned by authorized personnel on a random or non-random basis; the later being on reasonable cause. Authorized personnel being the key phrase and I would anticipate that the "contract guards" were acting in accordance to their duties; once of which may be assisting a TSA agent.

Maybe the original screener was a BDO and your not conversing with him/her was enough in their mind to warrant further investigation which set off the turn of events.

I hope it gets resolve to your satisfaction.You can be approached and questioned outside of a secure area of an airport as well, but that is not the direct issue here as much as the search and seizure of the OP. Can you point to the law or the CFR that says a search can be effected outside of the checkpoint or at the gate prior to boarding without probable cause?

You can be approached and questioned outside of a secure area of an airport as well, but that is not the direct issue here as much as the search and seizure of the OP. Can you point to the law or the CFR that says a search can be effected outside of the checkpoint or at the gate prior to boarding without probable cause?

I would guess it's the same law or CFR that permits gate searches, sterile area liquid testing, searches of deplaning pax on rare occasions, etc. I have seen signs in the sterile area reminding pax that they and their belongings are subject to search at any time.

I suspect that the time a pax is subject to search without cause extends from presentation at the original checkpoint to exiting the destination checkpoint (ATL international terminal is an example of this - terminating international arrivals have to go through TSA to exit the airport and go home).

I would guess it's the same law or CFR that permits gate searches, sterile area liquid testing, searches of deplaning pax on rare occasions, etc. I have seen signs in the sterile area reminding pax that they and their belongings are subject to search at any time.

I suspect that the time a pax is subject to search without cause extends from presentation at the original checkpoint to exiting the destination checkpoint (ATL international terminal is an example of this - terminating international arrivals have to go through TSA to exit the airport and go home).A review of those CFR's would show otherwise. Those searches done without probable cause are at the checkpoint or at the gate when boarding.

As for ATL, that is because you have had contact with your checked luggage and, as such, you no longer meet the requirements to be in the sterile area. If you wish, you can legally request an escort to the exit to avoid the checkpoint. No requirement exists to consent to a search to leave the airport.

Do you have the resources to hire a lawyer? I think this incident requires some effort by a lawyer to rattle chains with the local PD and the contract company employing those screeners - and if so, stop posting information about the incident on FT and delete your original post.

I would recommend refraining from further posting on FT in any event. The case MIGHT wind up in court even if you don't expect it.

I would recommend refraining from further posting on FT in any event. The case MIGHT wind up in court even if you don't expect it.

Would you like to expand on that?

the OP may decide at some future point that he wants to retain counsel to prosecute/follow up on this action. If it does go to court, civil or criminal, it's probably best he doesn't try the case on the internet.

Or at least plug some of the holes in it first.

A review of those CFR's would show otherwise. Those searches done without probable cause are at the checkpoint or at the gate when boarding.

As for ATL, that is because you have had contact with your checked luggage and, as such, you no longer meet the requirements to be in the sterile area. If you wish, you can legally request an escort to the exit to avoid the checkpoint. No requirement exists to consent to a search to leave the airport.

The sterile area encompasses everything from presenting your identification in the security line to the gates.

The 9th Circuit Court addressed some of these issues and, I think, there is case law with respect to the 4th Amendment and exemptions within the sterile area (and other non-airport areas as well.)

I still wonder what was the original issue for a complaint to be lodged. Perhaps being "assertive" was enough to warrant further investigation i.e. non-random secondary screening. I did speak to someone who is familiar with ROC and they also felt that the being non-responsive when questioned might have been a big concern.

The sterile area encompasses everything from presenting your identification in the security line to the gates.

The 9th Circuit Court addressed some of these issues and, I think, there is case law with respect to the 4th Amendment and exemptions within the sterile area (and other non-airport areas as well.)


I believe based on my reading of legal and non-legal sources (I am not a lawyer) that administrative searches, like those at the checkpoint and the gate, are carved out as legal because they are non-random. At the checkpoint, everybody is searched. At the gate (or a sobriety checkpoint) that every X number must be checked.

I will be the first to admit that I don't see the gate checks following this standard, but I believe the non-randomness is the reason for its allowance.

I still wonder what was the original issue for a complaint to be lodged. Perhaps being "assertive" was enough to warrant further investigation i.e. non-random secondary screening. I did speak to someone who is familiar with ROC and they also felt that the being non-responsive when questioned might have been a big concern.

I believe that, like many passengers who disagree with the choice between body scanners and a pat down, the OP files a complaint after each passage through the checkpoint. I understand this to be the source of the original complaint.

As to the point of non-responsiveness being a concern, I would very much doubt that an exercise of one's Constitutional right of not speaking to the government could every qualify as grounds for a search.

The sterile area encompasses everything from presenting your identification in the security line to the gates.Actually, no. The sterile area does not start until airside of the checkpoint. The checkpoint is not sterile as passengers are still being examined therein to determine if they meet the criteria to enter the sterile area. Even after presenting identification, you can leave without being searched. Once you have set your property on the x-ray belt or agree to go through the WBI or WTMD, then you have to complete the search.

The 9th Circuit Court addressed some of these issues and, I think, there is case law with respect to the 4th Amendment and exemptions within the sterile area (and other non-airport areas as well.)What is that court case and its holding? Does it address searches and seizures without probable cause airside at places other than the checkpoint and the gate prior to boarding. If not, then perhaps a review of the CFR's are in order. They have been discussed and analyzed on this forum previously.

I still wonder what was the original issue for a complaint to be lodged. Perhaps being "assertive" was enough to warrant further investigation i.e. non-random secondary screening. I did speak to someone who is familiar with ROC and they also felt that the being non-responsive when questioned might have been a big concern.Exercising one's constitutional rights may not be used to infer reasonable suspicion (although that rule is broken every day).

The plainclothed TSA supervisor and Airline supervisor repeatedly conferred with one another, apparently to ensure that I was not released until after my flight boarded. Once they confirmed the flight was closed, the two LEOs walked me the 50 feet to the gate I was supposed to depart from. They waited there as the GA explained that my flight had closed "30 seconds" ago and began rebooking me.

So the "Airline supervisor" was aware of your situation, and appears to have cooperated with the effort to delay you solely for the purpose of missing your flight. Not a government agent. Thus a more vulnerable potential defendant, together with his or her employer.

OK, which airline?

Do you have the resources to hire a lawyer? I think this incident requires some effort by a lawyer to rattle chains with the local PD and the contract company employing those screeners - and if so, stop posting information about the incident on FT and delete your original post.

From a practical perspective, why would I bother doing that?

The harm I suffered was missing a flight and the IDB compensation rules pretty much define the upper limit of compensation for missing a flight. In other words, the value of what I might claim is only 2 or 3 hours of an attorney's time, so why bother hiring one?

Furthermore, am I really going to find a ROC-area attorney who knows enough about TSA to properly address the issue? I honestly think there is better expertise here in this community of FFers.

There are several other reasons why I dislike the idea, but those reasons involve my personal values and beliefs, so discussion of them would have to happen over in the debate forum.... which reminds me: To everyone who has replied to me, I thank you for limiting your responses to practical advice!

OK, which airline?

I am not going to identify the airline prior to receiving a response to the written complaint that I submitted to them.... but there is a pretty big hint visible included in my posts.


<<<----- Look over there. ;)

From a practical perspective, why would I bother doing that?

I think this is a very good point. Your damages are likely to be limited to the value of the lost time and (I cannot remember if you got a later flight) the value of the flight. If you could prove you lost some sort of opportunity for certain, a jury might award the value of that opportunity if the flight arrived on time.

The only reason I might consider retaining an attorney is if you think this might escalate to the level of continual harassment, in which case getting your evidence documented and subject to privilege might be worth the cost.

NB: I am not an attorney, I am a damages expert, so my perspective is from that angle.

Did you ever hear back from anyone?

Did you ever hear back from anyone?

Yes, I did.

Yes, I did.

What did you hear? . . .

Yes, I did.

This response (with the omission of any content) tells me a *LOT* about why/how this thread even exists.