Practical Travel Safety Issues - TSA and amount of discretion allowed

Hi all,

Having gone through several check points throught USA in the past 2 weeks, i like to gauge your opinion to the shoe carnival before i write in a serious complaint letter and perhaps follow throught with their HR.
I am a non-US citizen so please excuse my ignorance if im not familiar with the slang being used or the culture.

I entered the USA on 5 July 2005 and exited on 15 July 2005.

Throught my entire stay, i flew from LAX to ORD(Los Angeles to Chicago)
ORD to IAD(Chicago to Washington Dulles Airport)
DCA to LAX via ORD(Washington to LAX)
LAX to HNL(Los Angeles to Hawaii, return)

Throught my trips, i encountered a few TSA folks, The friendliest, i have to stay is at Chicago who did things by the book, politely, sensitively and efficiently. as well as Hawaii.

The worst was at DCA. There is an incident i like to relate to you all and have your opinion before i write in.

For the sake of shortening this message, the TSA folks wanted me to take off my shoes. I was wearing blue sneakers which were less than 1 Inch. I asked for the supervisor and she threatened me that if i do not take off my shoes, i would go through secondary. She then says to let them do their job in a sarcastic manner. She further says that if i wish to fly today, i have to take off my shoes even if its less than 1 inch. What i did was to mention the 1 inch rule and asked twice if she was sure she wanted to do this and whether she approved the actions of the TSA agent. She answered yes to both questions. At all other check-points, i was never asked to take off my shoes.

The impression given to me at DCA airport is that TSA folks are allowed to exercise their discretion but they are also allowed to be rude and abusive to customers even if they are foreign nationals. I have also noticed discriminatory treatment towards me and other foreign nationals. We were talked to in a loud, threatening manner. At no point, was cultural sensitivity observed. For the record, i am not muslim and i look chinese.

My question to flyertalkers is this:
For the rule of 1 inch, its not a published rule. Is there any proof that only shoes less than 1 inch need to be taken off. If so, is there any official website that can back this up.

Personally, i am quite upset by the whole ordeal and felt extremely insulted as i was given the impression that tourists are not welcomed in the USA and especially in Washington DC. The TSA agents were VERY rude. Furthermore, i was given the impression that even though rules exist for teh behaviour of TSA folks, they do not have to follow it and can decide who to be nice and who not to be nice

Your opinions please,

Thank you

My question to flyertalkers is this:
For the rule of 1 inch, its not a published rule. Is there any proof that only shoes less than 1 inch need to be taken off. If so, is there any official website that can back this up.


Welcome to our world. :(

Any wonder why Americans tend to be biased against starting new government bureaucracy to deal with an issue that private industry had previously handled competently?

On the specific question: It is a complete nonstarter. If the screener says take off your shoes or suffer secondary, there's nothing published by the TSA that you can use as a shield. Nothing.

The one inch sole thickness is an internal guideline for the screeners; it is not a hard and fast rule that prevents the mistreatment you suffered. If the screener reasonably estimates your shoes at one inch or greater, then off they come one way or another. They're gonna get x-rayed or you don't fly. Doesn't that ultimatum make your blood boil? It makes me madder than hell.

As an American, I am ashamed that you paid good money to be mistreated by losers employed by our government. In my entire life, I have never been so mistreated in the UK by anyone (not even at the UK airports post-September 11). :(

On my own behalf and on behalf of all similar-thinking Americans, allow me to apologize to you.

I'm sorry you had to deal with it. At least you're not a visitor and have to deal with it regularly, so there's at least some solace in that.

Here's something from a thread a few weeks ago that might be interesting to some:

"Take Scissors Away stated the following in a thread dated June 25, 2004:

This only applies to those wearing "non criteria" footwear.

When getting ready to walk thru and asked to take your shoes off, tell them it is not required. If you don't alarm, and are sent to 2ndary harrassment, play the game. When your shoes are wanded, and they don't alarm, and they ask you to remove your shoes, tell them it is not required. The screener "cannot demand" you remove your shoes, if they don't alarm the HHMD. If they give you any guff about this, ask to see a screening mgr. immediately !!
When he / she arrives, ask them "Why" you must remove your shoes ? If they give you the SOS about R. Reid, or that all shoes need to be screened, tell them to pull out the SOP dated 6/02/04 rev.4 change 2, and read sec. 10.1.3.b.

After reading this, they will probably give you a blank look, or some BS about " Well, at this airport, shoes are required to be removed !". NOT !!! Per SOP, local policy CANNOT "override, surpercede, or otherwise overrule" the SOP !! A FSD "DOES NOT" have the authority to deviate from the TSA mandated SOP...........period !!!!!!!"

Welcome to our world.

And it is darn good world at that.

On my own behalf and on behalf of all similar-thinking Americans, allow me to apologize to you.

No apologizing from my keyboard. Take off your shoes and the travel experience will be a breeze. No hassles. No problems. Straight to the plane.

And it is darn good world at that.



No apologizing from my keyboard. Take off your shoes and the travel experience will be a breeze. No hassles. No problems. Straight to the plane.



^ ^ ^ Once again we "tsk..tsk" around someone and make apologies for something that their actions provoked. Americans need to stop apologizing for every single perceived injustice in the world. REMOVE THE SHOES! So much easier, although makes for boring writing on f.t. and will have granola munchers telling you about your loss of personal freedoms. Oh, and by the way, I have been to the U.K. several times and witnessed nice/rude/indifferent people....just like the USA. In my many travels around the world I have found that your attitude, in most cases, is reflected back at you by strangers.

Have a great day all! :p

Take off your shoes.... No hassles.

Taking off shoes -- esp. after making sure you have non-profile shoes (confirmed by other TSA agents at other screening points) is a hassle. :(

No apologizing from my keyboard. Take off your shoes and the travel experience will be a breeze. No hassles. No problems. Straight to the plane.

And it won't be any worse when they ask us to get in the boxcars. By the way, on the other side of the door is a shower.

It starts bit by bit.

I like to express my gratitue to everyone who has expressed their opinion and to SDF_traveler for that extremely nice private message. To FWAAA, a big thank you for making me feel welcomed by americans. At least there may be hope in finding a genuine, honest and sensitive american.

I kind of suspected that the 1 inch rule was only a guideline but had been fussed about here by frequent posters for its minor annoyance.

To be honest, i was kinda a bit upset by the impression left by the female supervisor more than the agent. I didnt raise my voice at any time but asked at least 3 times whether they were sure they wanted to do the shoe carnival and it was an obvious attitude of indifference towards reasonable travellers as well as not taking pride in doing your job. Either complaint letters are falling upon deaf ears or that employees can't be bothered.

I do have names and the TSA badge numbers but am not sure if its worth the effort.

The concern i have about the "shoe carnival" is that how safe and clean are those floors we are made to walk upon either with socks or bare feet. In the USA where details are sometimes hard to keep track,it is reasonable that someone will get some foot disease from being made to walk upon dubiously clean floors. If TSA make children take off their shoes, is it probable that it can be a source for hand, foot and mouth disease.

With the amount of discretion being allowed to TSA, i did bring it up with the United Ground security controller who promised to follow up with the FSD. Its questionable whether anyone is supervising TSA.

In some conversations with cabin crew of asian airlines, i've been told that the GSC has told them to just follow what the TSA asks as the TSA are the authority with screening and no point arguing with them.

Thats why i asked for opinions and am doubtful whether to send a letter to the FSD for DCA airport.

Hopefully, "BART" might read this thread and pass the feedback to his head office.

once again, thank you

You stated yourself that you were treated differently as you traveled throughout the U.S. How you are addressed in the southeast is NOT how you will be treated in the northeast or the northwest,southwest etc etc. Big cultural diffrence. Is it not like this were you are from? As far as complaining to the DCA FSD, he probably has the same attitude as his screeners. The whole northeast has a attitude problem.

The screener "cannot demand" you remove your shoes, if they don't alarm the HHMD. If they give you any guff about this, ask to see a screening mgr. immediately !!
When he / she arrives, ask them "Why" you must remove your shoes ? If they give you the SOS about R. Reid, or that all shoes need to be screened, tell them to pull out the SOP dated 6/02/04 rev.4 change 2, and read sec. 10.1.3.b.

After reading this, they will probably give you a blank look, or some BS about " Well, at this airport, shoes are required to be removed !". NOT !!! Per SOP, local policy CANNOT "override, surpercede, or otherwise overrule" the SOP !! A FSD "DOES NOT" have the authority to deviate from the TSA mandated SOP...........period !!!!!!!"
Go ahead and quote the SOP if you want. Managers generally don't know the SOP and will more than likely call the cops for non compliance. Hell even ask to see the SOP ;)

^ ^ ^ Once again we "tsk..tsk" around someone and make apologies for something that their actions provoked. Americans need to stop apologizing for every single perceived injustice in the world. REMOVE THE SHOES! So much easier, although makes for boring writing on f.t. and will have granola munchers telling you about your loss of personal freedoms. Oh, and by the way, I have been to the U.K. several times and witnessed nice/rude/indifferent people....just like the USA. In my many travels around the world I have found that your attitude, in most cases, is reflected back at you by strangers.

Have a great day all! :p

I see far more government screamers in the US than in the UK. ;)

I see far more government screamers in the US than in the UK. ;)

I see far more security cameras in the UK than in the US. ;) An invasion of civil liberties? ;)

My question to flyertalkers is this:
For the rule of 1 inch, its not a published rule. Is there any proof that only shoes less than 1 inch need to be taken off. If so, is there any official website that can back this up.

Personally, i am quite upset by the whole ordeal and felt extremely insulted as i was given the impression that tourists are not welcomed in the USA and especially in Washington DC. The TSA agents were VERY rude. Furthermore, i was given the impression that even though rules exist for teh behaviour of TSA folks, they do not have to follow it and can decide who to be nice and who not to be nice

Your opinions please,

Thank you


Welcome to the "Club". Seriously there's a club :D. This happens all of the time and if the TSA actually did something about those TSA people who abuse the "Law", then the TSA would just about half their "Forces of Security". There's not much to do about the fact that a lot of TSA Security Personnel don't abide by the rules. They can make you do anything they want. Soon they'll be able to make you strip soon. :rolleyes: If there was a great ting we could do about it, you would know already.

I see far more security cameras in the UK than in the US. ;) An invasion of civil liberties? ;)

Unlike some others, I have no objection to having a camera where ever you might reasonably find a law enforcement officer. Street corners, banks etc are all fair game.

Oddly enough I had good experiences with TSA at MDW this week. On Monday they were very polite when I didn't take off my non-profile dress shoes. I had no intention of standing on one foot trying to put my shoes back on. I had to go to secondary after I didn't set of the metal detector. They happily retrieved my laptop with no argument. They wanded me...Swabbed my shoes to check for explosives and waved me through.

Same nice treatment in LA for the return. At least they did not try to be intimidating. They were quite pleasant!

And it won't be any worse when they ask us to get in the boxcars. By the way, on the other side of the door is a shower.

It starts bit by bit.

I enjoy reading/participating in a good discussion as much as the next person and I'm all for everyone expressing their own opinion; however, thinking that shoe removal will lead to what happened in the Holocaust is just ignorant. I'm not trying to be rude but that is ridiculous. I know you are probably just trying to make a point but you didn't make it and you trivalized a tradegy.

OK, "shame on you" speech over.

Having said that, I think we all know that the shoe removal thing is just a part of the whole process and sometimes that process fails in places. I look at it this way, at least I have a pair of shoes to wear. When your biggest worry is being "hassled" over removing your shoes, then maybe you should find something else to worry about.

I don't really buy the "first it shoes, then what next". After all, it's not like you are being stopped on the street or in your homes and asked to remove your shoes. It's happening at a place that you chose to be at. Yeah, I know, you didn't choose, your work made you fly. If you really believe that this whole shoe removal thing is one more freedom taken away from you, then I've got a cabin up in Idaho that I'm willing to sell.

How come I hear all this noise about the shoes, but never seem to hear anything about looking through my bag as they x-ray it?

On the scale of injustices, I'm not sure that the shoe thing even makes the needle vibrate, let alone move.

Just my opinion and thank you for letting me express it.... :)

Sorry for the trouble that you got in DCA. You dont have to take your shoes off if they dont alarm anything. THis means that if you walk through and they send you down because in their infinite ability to judge shoes sole height and they have not alarmed the hand wand or the ETD machine, you dont take them off. If there is a hand wand alarm because of anything; Eyelets, nails, a bump with the wand etc. You will have to have them x-rayed. IF they alarm the ETD machine, they have to x-rayed. You dont have to stand in you bare feet or your socks though. IF you decline to take them off after they alarm, you may not be allowed to continue to your gate.

And it won't be any worse when they ask us to get in the boxcars. By the way, on the other side of the door is a shower.

It starts bit by bit.

When all else fails - invoke the Nazi regime, that'll show 'em. Just a hint, SirFly-, you are not gaining any points by invoking the wunderkids "go to" line.

And BTW, if it is going to be that bad in the future, you should start packing. I presume you believe what you type.

When your biggest worry is being "hassled" over removing your shoes, then maybe you should find something else to worry about.


Exactly.

Go ahead and quote the SOP if you want. Managers generally don't know the SOP and will more than likely call the cops for non compliance. Hell even ask to see the SOP ;)

If they don't know the SOP, that's yet another problem with this agency and why it needs to go. :)

I like to express my gratitue to everyone who has expressed their opinion and to SDF_traveler for that extremely nice private message. To FWAAA, a big thank you for making me feel welcomed by americans. At least there may be hope in finding a genuine, honest and sensitive american.

I kind of suspected that the 1 inch rule was only a guideline but had been fussed about here by frequent posters for its minor annoyance.

To be honest, i was kinda a bit upset by the impression left by the female supervisor more than the agent. I didnt raise my voice at any time but asked at least 3 times whether they were sure they wanted to do the shoe carnival and it was an obvious attitude of indifference towards reasonable travellers as well as not taking pride in doing your job. Either complaint letters are falling upon deaf ears or that employees can't be bothered.

I do have names and the TSA badge numbers but am not sure if its worth the effort.

The concern i have about the "shoe carnival" is that how safe and clean are those floors we are made to walk upon either with socks or bare feet. In the USA where details are sometimes hard to keep track,it is reasonable that someone will get some foot disease from being made to walk upon dubiously clean floors. If TSA make children take off their shoes, is it probable that it can be a source for hand, foot and mouth disease.

With the amount of discretion being allowed to TSA, i did bring it up with the United Ground security controller who promised to follow up with the FSD. Its questionable whether anyone is supervising TSA.

In some conversations with cabin crew of asian airlines, i've been told that the GSC has told them to just follow what the TSA asks as the TSA are the authority with screening and no point arguing with them.

Thats why i asked for opinions and am doubtful whether to send a letter to the FSD for DCA airport.

Hopefully, "BART" might read this thread and pass the feedback to his head office.

once again, thank you


It's worth the effort to submit a written complaint, and in this case, not only to the FSD but to the United Airlines station manager at DCA.

Point out the following:

The rude treatment by the supervisor (would be great if you had the name). Whenever there's a disagreement or other unpleasant encounter between screener and passenger, the supervisor is supposed to be the one each can rely on to handle the situation in a calm, professional and courteous manner. In this case, you were bullied by the very person who is supposed to be the neutral arbiter.

Compliance with security procedures. Be sure to emphasize that you have no problem with following security screening procedures; however, it is frustrating when you know you are following those procedures correctly yet TSA screeners clearly deviate from that procedure.

Key to this is that you state your anger and frustration but avoid inflammatory remarks in your letter. Otherwise, you only end up diluting your message.

I hope you do follow up on this. People who threaten passengers as a first resort have no business being supervisors and give the rest of us screeners a bad name.

If they don't know the SOP, that's yet another problem with this agency and why it needs to go. :)

Supervisors run screening operations and screening managers manage them. Managers are not supposed to be in the weeds. There's nothing wrong with this concept although you apparently believe in micromanagement. What should happen is that the screening manager ensures the supervisor resolves the situation professionally and competently. Should screening managers know the SOP? Well, they should be familiar with it or at least know where to look things up should there be any specific questions about a certain procedure. However, they are not nor should they be involved in the mechanics of screening operations. Problem is that we do have some who are, and it makes screening that much more frustrating for screeners, leads and supervisors because everything becomes a matter of politics and cheap PR.

Supervisors run screening operations and screening managers manage them. Managers are not supposed to be in the weeds. There's nothing wrong with this concept although you apparently believe in micromanagement. What should happen is that the screening manager ensures the supervisor resolves the situation professionally and competently. Should screening managers know the SOP? Well, they should be familiar with it or at least know where to look things up should there be any specific questions about a certain procedure. However, they are not nor should they be involved in the mechanics of screening operations. Problem is that we do have some who are, and it makes screening that much more frustrating for screeners, leads and supervisors because everything becomes a matter of politics and cheap PR.
If the manager of SCREENING is not supposed to know the SOP, what the hell is their function????????????????????

Bart, you've been with the government too long. You need to find employement in the real world. You have demonstrated time and again that you are far too intelligent to think that way.

Bart, you've been with the government too long. You need to find employement in the real world. You have demonstrated time and again that you are far too intelligent to think that way.

I was completely out of line and offer my apologies to the forum members for my original response. I've deleted it.

There are times when the best response is to turn off the computer and walk away. I should have done that.

I enjoy reading/participating in a good discussion as much as the next person and I'm all for everyone expressing their own opinion; however, thinking that shoe removal will lead to what happened in the Holocaust is just ignorant. I'm not trying to be rude but that is ridiculous. I know you are probably just trying to make a point but you didn't make it and you trivalized a tradegy.

I think the point was made. The Holocaust was a tragedy, but it was also a hidden agenda by the administration, who at the time had the majority support of the people.

The shoe carnival is only a small part of the very big problem that's begun to develop -- with the patriot act, random road checkpoints, ID requirements, no-fly lists, etc.

Of course W isn't going to come out and say he wants to come out and turn America into a totalitarian regime. He'd never get support. But if the American people are ignorant enough to hand over their rights one by one...

While we aren't there yet, and I don't mean any disrespect for the Holocaust losses, there are many parallels between the current administration and Hitler's. As the other poster said, it does start a little bit at a time...

I think the point was made. The Holocaust was a tragedy, but it was also a hidden agenda by the administration, who at the time had the majority support of the people.

The shoe carnival is only a small part of the very big problem that's begun to develop -- with the patriot act, random road checkpoints, ID requirements, no-fly lists, etc.

Of course W isn't going to come out and say he wants to come out and turn America into a totalitarian regime. He'd never get support. But if the American people are ignorant enough to hand over their rights one by one...

While we aren't there yet, and I don't mean any disrespect for the Holocaust losses, there are many parallels between the current administration and Hitler's. As the other poster said, it does start a little bit at a time...

As a matter of fact, one of Goebbels' favorite lines was tell the people a lie often enough, and they will begin to see it as the truth. Any thinking, rational person can deduce that multiple ID checks and shoe inspections do nothing to make us safer. Yet the administration continues to bluster about a non-existent cause-and effect scenario that reasons that a lack of stateside terror attacks confirms that security "procedures" are effective.

London is a living proof that if suicide bombers want to perpetrate an attack, they will. the only thing that can stop a suicide bomber (other than decent intelligence) are complete, constant searches, which would completely cripple the nation. If it comes to that, we definitely lost the "war on terror".

Supervisors run screening operations and screening managers manage them. Managers are not supposed to be in the weeds. There's nothing wrong with this concept although you apparently believe in micromanagement. What should happen is that the screening manager ensures the supervisor resolves the situation professionally and competently. Should screening managers know the SOP? Well, they should be familiar with it or at least know where to look things up should there be any specific questions about a certain procedure. However, they are not nor should they be involved in the mechanics of screening operations. Problem is that we do have some who are, and it makes screening that much more frustrating for screeners, leads and supervisors because everything becomes a matter of politics and cheap PR.

No, I don't support micromanagement. However, there is a big problem if management doesn't know the SOP. It's a big problem that screeners aren't familiar with it either (or at least appear to be), as they're the ones that are supposed to be enforcing it.

I might be a relatively low person at work and haven't been working there as long as others have (well, if you go by the GS scale, I'm an 11, so not terribly low), but I for darn sure know enough of the SOP to do my job and to keep out of trouble for violating it (and yes, it can have serious consequences). If I don't know a procedure, I ask.

Bart, you and I both know that a lot of the "security" going on now is politics and cheap PR. If it wasn't, we wouldn't have shoe carnivals, multiple ID checks, people barking at checkpoints, etc and more resources going to bigger vulnerabilities like cargo and personnel that actually have access to the plane (a la catering trucks). It's CYA mode to appear like they're doing something to protect us, but it puts undue pain and strain on folks like you and folks like the rest of us.

If I'm going to complain, I want to take my complaint to someone who knows their stuff. If the screener knows more than management, we're all screwed. That means that TSA is an inverted pyramid with the knowledge at the bottom of the heap with management on top with little knowledge. Maybe that's the case now.

I know you know a lot and that you don't fit that mold. However, the average screeners (and supervisors for that matter) fit that mold.

Super

No, I don't support micromanagement. However, there is a big problem if management doesn't know the SOP. It's a big problem that screeners aren't familiar with it either (or at least appear to be), as they're the ones that are supposed to be enforcing it.

I might be a relatively low person at work and haven't been working there as long as others have (well, if you go by the GS scale, I'm an 11, so not terribly low), but I for darn sure know enough of the SOP to do my job and to keep out of trouble for violating it (and yes, it can have serious consequences). If I don't know a procedure, I ask.

Bart, you and I both know that a lot of the "security" going on now is politics and cheap PR. If it wasn't, we wouldn't have shoe carnivals, multiple ID checks, people barking at checkpoints, etc and more resources going to bigger vulnerabilities like cargo and personnel that actually have access to the plane (a la catering trucks). It's CYA mode to appear like they're doing something to protect us, but it puts undue pain and strain on folks like you and folks like the rest of us.

If I'm going to complain, I want to take my complaint to someone who knows their stuff. If the screener knows more than management, we're all screwed. That means that TSA is an inverted pyramid with the knowledge at the bottom of the heap with management on top with little knowledge. Maybe that's the case now.

I know you know a lot and that you don't fit that mold. However, the average screeners (and supervisors for that matter) fit that mold.

Super

I'd like to re-explain my original response. Screening managers should have a working knowledge of screening operations. The real experts ought to be supervisors and lead screeners. The problem is that there are some screening managers who have no knowledge of the SOP and rely too much on supervisors. Then there are others who, because they were former supervisors, forget that they are now managers and tend to get their hands on the specifics of the job and make it frustrating for everybody else. It requires true leadership to understand the difference. Like the old Kenny Rogers song, gotta know when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em.

My distaste for micromanagement comes from my military experiences. I've seen full bull colonels get into the weeds of things that should have been handled by captains. The result is that we end up losing our on-the-ground flexibility that is so crucial to successful military operations. While checkpoint operations in no way is comparable to reconnaissance patrols or combat raids, the same concept of leadership still applies.

Getting back to the basic issue here, when a passenger complains to a screening manager about the way a certain procedure was conducted, the screening manager should have a working knowledge of how it should have been conducted. A smart screening manager will mentor the supervisor in the right direction so that the matter is handled competently, professionally and decisively. Unfortunately, there are some screaming managers (no Freudian slip here) who assume the role of supervisor and begin dictating how things ought to be run. Of course, again speaking from my military background, I hold the supervisors in contempt for not having the testical fortitude to stand up to the screening managers when this happens.

I may be completely out of line with my way of thinking. I'm still a rookie in civilian government circles and am still learning about the rinky dink way decisions are carried out and the chickensh*t manner that CYA measures are implemented. For a great majority of my military career, I've worked in what could be described as elite units where competence was never in question except when dealing with the paper-pushing careerist staff pukes at headquarters. So, yes, there are things within the TSA realm that I find frustrating. When I think about it some more, I realize that perhaps that's the way things are in regular conventional military units; I just wasn't exposed to it as often because of some pretty unique assignments.

At any rate, I hope the OP submits a complaint and fries that supervisor. As passengers, you have every right to be treated with courtesy and respect. I'm a firm believer in this.

If the manager of SCREENING is not supposed to know the SOP, what the hell is their function????????????????????
Duh, where have you been? They hang out at Starbucks and ogle women. :eek: Get with the program.

I'd like to re-explain my original response. Screening managers should have a working knowledge of screening operations. The real experts ought to be supervisors and lead screeners. The problem is that there are some screening managers who have no knowledge of the SOP and rely too much on supervisors. Then there are others who, because they were former supervisors, forget that they are now managers and tend to get their hands on the specifics of the job and make it frustrating for everybody else. It requires true leadership to understand the difference. Like the old Kenny Rogers song, gotta know when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em.

Ok, I can agree with that.

My distaste for micromanagement comes from my military experiences. I've seen full bull colonels get into the weeds of things that should have been handled by captains. The result is that we end up losing our on-the-ground flexibility that is so crucial to successful military operations. While checkpoint operations in no way is comparable to reconnaissance patrols or combat raids, the same concept of leadership still applies.

I agree here.

The bottom line comes to getting the issue resolved. I don't think a lot of us would like to bother a screening manager if at all possible. I know I wouldn't. However, it really irks people when the supervisors blindly back up the subordinate (and mind you this goes beyond screening to other employers as well). If the employee's right, then by all means, the supervisor should stick up for them. However, if the employee's wrong, there needs to be reasonable assurance that the problem's going to be fixed. We're not talking flogging the screener in our presence or anything like that, but rather a genuine promise to resolve the issue. Then we hope the next time we go back thru there that the problem doesn't arise again.

Of course, the issue is that it's perceived that TSA doesn't care about passenger complaints and only gives canned responses ... if you're fortunate enough to get one at all.

Getting back to the basic issue here, when a passenger complains to a screening manager about the way a certain procedure was conducted, the screening manager should have a working knowledge of how it should have been conducted. A smart screening manager will mentor the supervisor in the right direction so that the matter is handled competently, professionally and decisively. Unfortunately, there are some screaming managers (no Freudian slip here) who assume the role of supervisor and begin dictating how things ought to be run. Of course, again speaking from my military background, I hold the supervisors in contempt for not having the testical fortitude to stand up to the screening managers when this happens.

I agree here too.

I may be completely out of line with my way of thinking. I'm still a rookie in civilian government circles and am still learning about the rinky dink way decisions are carried out and the chickensh*t manner that CYA measures are implemented. For a great majority of my military career, I've worked in what could be described as elite units where competence was never in question except when dealing with the paper-pushing careerist staff pukes at headquarters. So, yes, there are things within the TSA realm that I find frustrating. When I think about it some more, I realize that perhaps that's the way things are in regular conventional military units; I just wasn't exposed to it as often because of some pretty unique assignments.

No, you're not out of line with your thinking here. The federal government management is often very "Dilbert-esque." I almost have more comics on my wall at work from this year's calendar than not because it all fits so well. At least where I work, the enviornment is mixed between military and civilian and some of the management is military in those cases. While I think the military generally does a better job of having more competent person in a leadership position, I have seen many times where military leadership is just as bad as the civilian.