Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

Expansion of PreCheck Announced - Does PreCheck Change Your Mind About TSA Policies?

Expansion of PreCheck Announced - Does PreCheck Change Your Mind About TSA Policies?

Old Nov 13, 2011, 5:42 pm
  #31  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SYD (perenially), GVA (not in a long time)
Programs: QF PS, EK-Gold, Security Theatre Critic
Posts: 6,704
Originally Posted by SATTSO
Originally Posted by RadioGirl
Originally Posted by SATTSO
Yes, right now it only benefits a few passegers as it is still a pilot program. But what about when it is eventually opened to all passengers to apply, and all airlines at all airports?
Does "all passengers" include people who are not US citizens and/or live in the US? After all, such people fly within the USA every day.

Does "all passengers" include those who fly one round-trip every third year to visit grandchildren on the other side of the country, on a carefully researched discounted economy fare, for whom a $100 application fee would be too expensive? After all, such people fly within the USA every day.

Does "all passengers" include those who fly rarely, on different airlines, and therefore don't belong to or qualify for an airline's frequent flyer or elite program? After all, such people fly within the USA every day.

Does "all passengers" include a person who has never flown before but suddenly needs to fly across the country at short notice - to see a dying relative or go for a last-minute job interview - and won't have time for an application process? After all, such people fly within the USA every day.

Until the answer to all of the above is "yes", all this program is doing is creating a two-class society at the airport. And despite the fact that I don't belong to any of the groups listed above, I don't think that's acceptable. And as BubbaLoop said, I suspect it will make things even worse for the "have nots" as the entire TSA workfarce can concentrate its efforts on the "suspicious" minority.
Really easy to argue when you pick and chose what to argue about, as I clearly wrote "all passengers to apply". If you wish to discuss what I wrote, do so, but don't pick and chose from what I wrote - as that changes the context of what I stated. But perhaps that is the only way you can argue against what I said?
Okay, then, let me rephrase the questions to address the issue that it is the passenger who must apply to be in the program:
  • Will non-US citizens (living outside the US or within the US) be allowed to apply for the program and be evaluated on the same basis as US citizens?
  • Will people who do not reside in the US (US citizens or non-US citizens) be allowed to apply for the program and be evaluated on the same basis as US citizens residing in the US?
  • Will the application fees for the program be low enough that a person who only travels once every few years on a carefully chosen discount ticket can justify the additional cost?
  • Will the application process be fast enough that someone who is flying at, say, 24 hours notice can apply and be approved?

You asked the question about whether we would change our minds about this program "when it is eventually opened to all passengers to apply, and all airlines at all airports". I am trying to determine just what "all" means in your question. If it means "all US citizens living in the US who can justify spending $150/year and who can wait 6 weeks to be approved", then that's quite different from "everyone who flies though a US airport at any time."

See, if it reaches the point where 80% or 90% of passengers are "trusted travellers", then by definition the remaining 20% or 10% are "untrusted" or "suspicious" travellers and will get extra scrutiny at the checkpoint. The attitude of TSA is then likely to be "well, it's your own fault that you didn't apply for the PreCheck program." Or worse, "there must be something wrong with you if you didn't apply." But if entire categories of people - non-US citizens/residents, infrequent or last minute flyers - cannot apply, that continues to create a two-class system where these groups are systematically discriminated against by a US government agency.
RadioGirl is offline  
Old Nov 14, 2011, 8:08 am
  #32  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Louisville, KY, US
Programs: QF Plat - OW EMD | DL Gold / Starwood Gold
Posts: 6,106
Originally Posted by Mientree
I'll see your Boxer with a Paul, and raise with a McCaskill.
Ah, Senator Paul; I happen to be a constituent of his. Senator Paul is one of the two senators who represent me based on my residency.

As with any elected official, I can't say I see eye to eye with him, but he does have a number of things right when it comes to big government.
SDF_Traveler is offline  
Old Nov 15, 2011, 1:14 pm
  #33  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Southern California
Posts: 898
Originally Posted by RadioGirl
See, if it reaches the point where 80% or 90% of passengers are "trusted travellers", then by definition the remaining 20% or 10% are "untrusted" or "suspicious" travellers and will get extra scrutiny at the checkpoint. The attitude of TSA is then likely to be "well, it's your own fault that you didn't apply for the PreCheck program." Or worse, "there must be something wrong with you if you didn't apply." But if entire categories of people - non-US citizens/residents, infrequent or last minute flyers - cannot apply, that continues to create a two-class system where these groups are systematically discriminated against by a US government agency.
Stating differently, TSA will continue to presume people guilty until proven innocent except that there will be an option to "prove" yourself innocent by becoming a "trusted traveler".

I imagine at some point everyone who is eligible to do so will hand their privacy over in exchange for a reduced (but not completely eleiminated) probability of being pawed or ogled, which tells me that this whole thing is another social engineering experiment by Big Sis.
PoliceStateSurvivor is offline  
Old Nov 15, 2011, 8:02 pm
  #34  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
Originally Posted by PoliceStateSurvivor
I imagine at some point everyone who is eligible to do so will hand their privacy over in exchange for a reduced (but not completely eleiminated) probability of being pawed or ogled, which tells me that this whole thing is another social engineering experiment by Big Sis.
See, I'm of more of a mixed mind about the whole thing. Many TSA critics have called on TSA to quit screening "obvious" non-threats like kids and retirees and focus screening on intelligence-based targets. Well ... how is the TSA supposed to determine what passengers merit additional screening without doing some sort of analysis of the available data?

Trusted Traveler appears, to this completely uninformed bystander, to be getting at that process in a sort of inverse manner: they're using available data to choose whom not to screen intensely, rather than identifying threats. Ok, it's a bit backwards ... but if Trusted Traveler becomes available on a widespread basis (i.e. not just FF elites and GE holders), it might accomplish the same ends.

In short ... TSA is trying to be more intelligent about who it spends time screening. Isn't this basically a good thing?
jkhuggins is offline  
Old Nov 15, 2011, 8:21 pm
  #35  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: in the sky
Posts: 490
Originally Posted by jkhuggins
See, I'm of more of a mixed mind about the whole thing. Many TSA critics have called on TSA to quit screening "obvious" non-threats like kids and retirees and focus screening on intelligence-based targets. Well ... how is the TSA supposed to determine what passengers merit additional screening without doing some sort of analysis of the available data?

Trusted Traveler appears, to this completely uninformed bystander, to be getting at that process in a sort of inverse manner: they're using available data to choose whom not to screen intensely, rather than identifying threats. Ok, it's a bit backwards ... but if Trusted Traveler becomes available on a widespread basis (i.e. not just FF elites and GE holders), it might accomplish the same ends.

In short ... TSA is trying to be more intelligent about who it spends time screening. Isn't this basically a good thing?
So far, it seems that TT has allowed a few people predetermined to be trust-worthy due to an abundance of repetition routine air-travel and shared personal information to walk through the metal detector wearing shoes and outer clothing through the checkpoint. How intelligent is it if someone who simply cannot walk cannot be trusted no matter how much else is known about them?
loops is offline  
Old Nov 15, 2011, 9:09 pm
  #36  
Used to be Sydneysider
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: CPH
Programs: AS MVP/Gold (and 75K aspirant)
Posts: 2,984
Originally Posted by N965VJ
No animals should be more equal than others.

Everyone should go through the same screening to access the sterile area, including TSA and airline employees. X-ray of belongings, walk though / hand held metal detector, and Explosive Trace Detection / Explosive Trace Portal. Nothing more, nothing less.
I hear you, I really do, and agree with you in principle.

But honestly, right now I am so disgusted with the level of apathy on this issue that I'll happily take the pass on NoS and patdowns (thank you Global Entry) and let the other 99% get the screening they deserve from their inaction.
Savvy Traveler is offline  
Old Nov 15, 2011, 9:31 pm
  #37  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SYD (perenially), GVA (not in a long time)
Programs: QF PS, EK-Gold, Security Theatre Critic
Posts: 6,704
Post

Originally Posted by jkhuggins
See, I'm of more of a mixed mind about the whole thing. Many TSA critics have called on TSA to quit screening "obvious" non-threats like kids and retirees and focus screening on intelligence-based targets. Well ... how is the TSA supposed to determine what passengers merit additional screening without doing some sort of analysis of the available data?

Trusted Traveler appears, to this completely uninformed bystander, to be getting at that process in a sort of inverse manner: they're using available data to choose whom not to screen intensely, rather than identifying threats. Ok, it's a bit backwards ... but if Trusted Traveler becomes available on a widespread basis (i.e. not just FF elites and GE holders), it might accomplish the same ends.

In short ... TSA is trying to be more intelligent about who it spends time screening. Isn't this basically a good thing?
Many TSA critics, but not all. I believe kids and retirees and everyone else in between should be screened - with a WTMD and a baggage x-ray, and perhaps random ETD; with a HHMD and a gentle (Asia/Europe/Australia-style) patdown to resolve any WTMD alarms. Period.

6-yr-olds should not have their genitals handled by a TSA screener as part of a "random" search. But then, neither should 16-yr-olds, 26-yr-olds, 36-yr-olds, 46-yr-olds, 56-yr-olds, etc.

Even if TT was in response to the complaints, as you suggest, are there that many toddlers that are FF elites? That many 7-yr-olds who have a good enough credit history to pass the application? Are most GE and Nexus members young children or retirees? IOW, how does the current trial, or the predictable extension, address the problem of screening those who appear to be a non-threat?

It is not (or at least, it should not be) a question of "who will receive lighter screening" but a question of "are the 'regular' screening methods appropriate for anyone". If they are not appropriate, it is a waste of time deciding which subgroup should be exempt from them.

And since we don't yet have answers to my questions above, for the time being we will have to assume that non-US citizens (and possibly US citizens resident abroad) will not be part of the "widespread" application you envision. Which means that French toddlers and Australian retirees and German nuns will still be considered "UnTrusted Travelers." Why exactly should such people "merit additional screening"? How did they become "intelligence-based targets" simply by being ineligible for the TT program?
RadioGirl is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2011, 12:21 am
  #38  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: FLL - Nice and Warm
Programs: TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 1,025
Originally Posted by Sydneysider
But honestly, right now I am so disgusted with the level of apathy on this issue that I'll happily take the pass on NoS and patdowns (thank you Global Entry) and let the other 99% get the screening they deserve from their inaction.
Me too - the AFS types get to "feel safe" and I get to avoid some of the cr@p they think is "keeping us safe"
Wimpie is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2011, 6:46 am
  #39  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
Originally Posted by RadioGirl
And since we don't yet have answers to my questions above, for the time being we will have to assume that non-US citizens (and possibly US citizens resident abroad) will not be part of the "widespread" application you envision. Which means that French toddlers and Australian retirees and German nuns will still be considered "UnTrusted Travelers." Why exactly should such people "merit additional screening"? How did they become "intelligence-based targets" simply by being ineligible for the TT program?
Your argument is compelling ... which is why, as I said earlier, I'm of a mixed mind regarding the whole thing. This is one of the problems of using TT to exclude non-threats instead of isolating threats; lots of people like kids and non-US passengers simply have no accessible data trail to investigate, making them more likely to be targeted for additional screening.

But I also have no alternative to present, either. So I guess I'll continue to watch the debate ... and see how TT plays out when it moves out of the "pilot" stage to actual implementation.
jkhuggins is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2011, 7:06 am
  #40  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Programs: WN Nothing and spending the half million points from too many flights, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,043
Originally Posted by jkhuggins
Your argument is compelling ... which is why, as I said earlier, I'm of a mixed mind regarding the whole thing. This is one of the problems of using TT to exclude non-threats instead of isolating threats; lots of people like kids and non-US passengers simply have no accessible data trail to investigate, making them more likely to be targeted for additional screening.

But I also have no alternative to present, either. So I guess I'll continue to watch the debate ... and see how TT plays out when it moves out of the "pilot" stage to actual implementation.
I, too, am conflicted. Although I would be one of the last to be approved, WN primary airline and BNA as home airport, I would likely make the cut as I have already gotten NEXUS approval.

In a perfect world we would change from a two tier system of those presumed guilty but easily cleared and those that are highly suspicious and not easily cleared. If the TT program simply pulls away the percentage that can be precleared creating a third easily cleared tier and leaving the rest with no changes, then it will be a net positive. It does not have to be automatically assumed that because one is not a TT that they fall to a level lower than the one at which they currently are.

However, the devil is in the implementation. Two problems are likely, but both can be avoided. The first is obvious. The TSA needs to consider the non TT subset exactly as they do now, but it will be easy to accept the mentality that since one is not TT they must not be trusted. The second is less so. Anecdotal evidence is available that certain TSO's may view elite travelers with a certain level of contempt and treat them differently. If this occurs, it will only increase with a TT program.
InkUnderNails is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2011, 7:42 am
  #41  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,103
As a result of this TSA approach, young adults and teenagers, the very old, the unemployed/underemployed, the poor, the foreign-born, the foreign-residing (even US citizens) and ethnic/religious minorities are going to have a greater frequency of being harassed by the TSA than their representation amongst the flying public would otherwise indicate.

Large employers, having had major issues with the government and others over unlawful discrimination in hiring and promotion practices, had their feet held to the fire only because the numbers didn't work in its favor with regard to representation of protected classes of persons on the payroll -- and this was when no explicit employer policy or explicit practice could be identified that stipulated an exclusion of protected classes of persons. I'd rather that approach be used to hold the TSA's feet to the fire when it comes to dealing with passengers of those demographic background elements mentioned in my first paragraph above.

Add in the voodoo "security" of "behavior detection", and it becomes even more clear that the Statue of Liberty is being mocked by DHS/TSA on a daily basis.

Instead of obsessing about personalities, I'd rather that the TSA fix its act and focus upon far greater effectiveness in interdicting contraband weapons, explosives and incendiaries. As it is now, the TSA can't even get that right.

This entire situation has me viewing the "PreCheck" and its expansion as yet another sign of the TSA being broken and probably broken beyond repair in my lifetime.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2011, 5:32 pm
  #42  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SYD (perenially), GVA (not in a long time)
Programs: QF PS, EK-Gold, Security Theatre Critic
Posts: 6,704
Originally Posted by GUWonder
As a result of this TSA approach, young adults and teenagers, the very old, the unemployed/underemployed, the poor, the foreign-born, the foreign-residing (even US citizens) and ethnic/religious minorities are going to have a greater frequency of being harassed by the TSA than their representation amongst the flying public would otherwise indicate.

Large employers, having had major issues with the government and others over unlawful discrimination in hiring and promotion practices, had their feet held to the fire only because the numbers didn't work in its favor with regard to representation of protected classes of persons on the payroll -- and this was when no explicit employer policy or explicit practice could be identified that stipulated an exclusion of protected classes of persons. I'd rather that approach be used to hold the TSA's feet to the fire when it comes to dealing with passengers of those demographic background elements mentioned in my first paragraph above.

Add in the voodoo "security" of "behavior detection", and it becomes even more clear that the Statue of Liberty is being mocked by DHS/TSA on a daily basis.

Instead of obsessing about personalities, I'd rather that the TSA fix its act and focus upon far greater effectiveness in interdicting contraband weapons, explosives and incendiaries. As it is now, the TSA can't even get that right.

This entire situation has me viewing the "PreCheck" and its expansion as yet another sign of the TSA being broken and probably broken beyond repair in my lifetime.
Exactly.

The TSA should just man up and admit that liquids, shoes, waistbands, crotches and puffy hair are just not all that threatening, and get rid of the stupid procedures FOR EVERYONE.

This program is not about filtering out those who are "easily cleared" so that they can focus on the remaining passengers, it's about getting the frequent flyers and/or business travelers to stop complaining. It worked when they exempted pilots and flight attendants - let them keep their shoes on, give them a pass on the NoS, allow them to take liquids through, and (for the most part), flight crew have stopped complaining about the TSA. They don't care if the passengers get manhandled as long as THEY don't have to.

I'm guessing "FF elites and GE holders" are more likely to be business travelers and FFs than toddlers and the elderly poor. If they can get the FFs to shut up, there's no one left to complain except those shifty foreigners, old people and Auntie Mildred who saved for two years to go see her sister in San Diego. And who gives a d@mn about THEM, as long as the FFs get the short line?

ETA: Some of you are optimistic that Trusted Traveler means "no NoS". Some of you are optimistic that "all passengers" will be able to apply for Trusted Traveler. Yet TSA has announced plans to put 1,800 NoS "covering nearly all lanes by 2014." You do the math.
RadioGirl is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2011, 6:10 pm
  #43  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SYD (perenially), GVA (not in a long time)
Programs: QF PS, EK-Gold, Security Theatre Critic
Posts: 6,704
Originally Posted by InkUnderNails
Two problems are likely, but both can be avoided. The first is obvious. The TSA needs to consider the non TT subset exactly as they do now, but it will be easy to accept the mentality that since one is not TT they must not be trusted. The second is less so. Anecdotal evidence is available that certain TSO's may view elite travelers with a certain level of contempt and treat them differently. If this occurs, it will only increase with a TT program.
You don't say how these can be avoided. I believe that if the TT becomes widespread, HQ might issue policies saying that non-TT travelers should only get "regular" screening, but the folks at the checkpoint will make up their own interpretation: "he doesn't have TT , there must be something wrong with him."

Similarly, if screeners have a grudge against elite travelers, the Trusted Traveler program isn't going to change their attitude, or their reaction. If a checkpoint is busy and there are lots of TT passengers, they'll probably be too lazy to hassle you, but at someday when you're the only passenger at the checkpoint and you present your TT credentials, someone might decide to show you you're not such a big shot.

Lots of things look like a good idea on paper, but if it hasn't taken basic human nature into account, it's likely doomed to fail.
RadioGirl is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2011, 8:19 pm
  #44  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,388
Originally Posted by RadioGirl
I'm guessing "FF elites and GE holders" are more likely to be business travelers and FFs than toddlers and the elderly poor. If they can get the FFs to shut up, there's no one left to complain except those shifty foreigners, old people and Auntie Mildred who saved for two years to go see her sister in San Diego. And who gives a d@mn about THEM, as long as the FFs get the short line?
To play devil's advocate, your premise also means that the "anything for security" kettle-types will be subject to the more intrusive screening. Seems fitting, no?
Global_Hi_Flyer is offline  
Old Nov 16, 2011, 9:21 pm
  #45  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SYD (perenially), GVA (not in a long time)
Programs: QF PS, EK-Gold, Security Theatre Critic
Posts: 6,704
Originally Posted by Global_Hi_Flyer
To play devil's advocate, your premise also means that the "anything for security" kettle-types will be subject to the more intrusive screening. Seems fitting, no?
Some of the AFS types will actually enjoy it. "Dang, Martha, I sure feel safe now that the TSA made sure I don't have explosives in my shorts!"

Some of them will resent it, but be reassured by the fact that the rest of the line was those suspicious French and Australian and Brazilian people.

Most of the AFS types have never been further from home than the parking lot at WalMart, which means they've never been to the airport, much less on a plane.
RadioGirl is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.