Go Back   FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Sign in using an external account

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 11, 12, 6:18 pm   #1
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ATL Lost Luggage
Programs: Kryptonium Kettle, Hoping to reach TSADD (TSA Disparaging Diamond) this year; PC plat,former MR Plat
Posts: 2,377
Associated Press: TSA to allow Orlando-Sanford (SFB) Airport to use private screeners

Some news out of Florida today:

The Associated Press (posted on Miami Herald's website):
TSA to allow airport to use private screeners

Posted on Monday, 06.11.12


A short quote:

ORLANDO, Fla. -- The Transportation Security Administration will allow Orlando Sanford International Airport to opt out of using only federal agents for security screening.

TSA made the announcement Monday, which will allow the airport to go forward with changing to private security operations under federal supervision. The agency previously denied Sanford's application.
__________________
Every X-Ray you undergo incrementally increases your odds of a malignancy. TSA Glossed Over Cancer Concerns
RatherBeOnATrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 12, 6:49 pm   #2
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Programs: Frontier EarlyReturns Summit, DL GM
Posts: 887
Step one: Privatize airport security under TSA guidelines.

Step two: Replace all current screeners and supervisors with military veterans returning home. Not only are you getting people infinitely more qualified to actually provide a layer of security instead of a layer of stupidity, but you're taking jobs away from the pizza-box dwellers and giving them to those who've truly earned them.

Step three: Increase passenger safety and satisfaction. Save billions of dollars.
T.J. Bender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 12, 7:55 pm   #3
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.J. Bender View Post
Step two: Replace all current screeners and supervisors with military veterans returning home. Not only are you getting people infinitely more qualified to actually provide a layer of security instead of a layer of stupidity, but you're taking jobs away from the pizza-box dwellers and giving them to those who've truly earned them.
I'm all in favor of supporting our veterans ...

... but securing an airport checkpoint is qualitatively different from securing an honest-to-goodness war zone. I wouldn't be so quick to assume that the skills learned on a battlefield would automatically translate to an airport checkpoint. (After all, someone once said that the chief job of the military is to kill people and break stuff ... neither of which should be happening at a checkpoint on a regular basis ...)
jkhuggins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 12, 8:19 pm   #4
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: SAN
Programs: DL GM, UA 1P, AA fallen Gold, Marriott Gold, Priority Pass, Hertz #1 Gold
Posts: 283
OP wasn't it enough that you started this thread back in March? Orlando-Sanford (SFB) files paperwork to replace TSA with private screeners!
__________________
Where ever I go, there I am. Spelling matters!
wb9tio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 12, 10:54 pm   #5
Moderator: Manufactured Spending
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.J. Bender View Post
Step two: Replace all current screeners and supervisors with military veterans returning home. Not only are you getting people infinitely more qualified to actually provide a layer of security instead of a layer of stupidity, but you're taking jobs away from the pizza-box dwellers and giving them to those who've truly earned them.
That would be a huge insult to our veterans. They deserve better than working for airport security. Besides, it would hurt the image of the military if any employees engaged in inappropriate actions.
cbn42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 11, 12, 11:34 pm   #6
Ari
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by wb9tio View Post
OP wasn't it enough that you started this thread back in March? Orlando-Sanford (SFB) files paperwork to replace TSA with private screeners!
The paperwork was approved-- that is news. If you think a thread is a duplicate and should be merged into another thread, you can always use the RBP button.
Ari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 12, 12, 10:12 am   #7
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Programs: Frontier EarlyReturns Summit, DL GM
Posts: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbn42 View Post
That would be a huge insult to our veterans. They deserve better than working for airport security. Besides, it would hurt the image of the military if any employees engaged in inappropriate actions.
Many veterans come home to no job at all. I think the bigger insult to them is that they sit unemployed while GED-toting career failures hired off a pizza box are tasked with securing air travel.
T.J. Bender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 12, 12, 6:12 pm   #8
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Programs: Delta Air Lines, US Dividend Miles, Rapids Reward
Posts: 30,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ari View Post
The paperwork was approved-- that is news. If you think a thread is a duplicate and should be merged into another thread, you can always use the RBP button.
No, he don't have to push RBP. Just leave behind for now.
__________________
https://www.facebook.com/scottweinbergpage?ref=hl Go to my new Facebook Page. Enjoy!
http://www.scottysair.com/
N830MH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 12, 8:09 am   #9
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Somewhere between here and there...
Programs: WWF, Appalachian Mountain Club
Posts: 10,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkhuggins View Post
I'm all in favor of supporting our veterans ...

... but securing an airport checkpoint is qualitatively different from securing an honest-to-goodness war zone. I wouldn't be so quick to assume that the skills learned on a battlefield would automatically translate to an airport checkpoint. (After all, someone once said that the chief job of the military is to kill people and break stuff ... neither of which should be happening at a checkpoint on a regular basis ...)
But a veteran has at the very least proven that they have a degree of discipline and are able to be trained. Beyond opening a pizza box, that is.
tkey75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 12, 8:48 am   #10
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkey75 View Post
But a veteran has at the very least proven that they have a degree of discipline and are able to be trained. Beyond opening a pizza box, that is.
Many (if not most) TSOs exhibit the same ability.

And furthermore, some of the offenses that people complain the most about regarding TSOs could be characterized as militaristic attitudes (e.g. barking at passengers, verbal aggression, demands of unquestioning obedience). A veteran might be more likely to bring those attitudes into their work as a TSO in inappropriate ways.

All I'm saying is ... being good at one job doesn't automatically make you good at an unrelated job. Serving in the infantry and serving as an airport screener are largely unrelated jobs.
jkhuggins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 12, 8:55 am   #11
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Somewhere between here and there...
Programs: WWF, Appalachian Mountain Club
Posts: 10,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkhuggins View Post
Many (if not most) TSOs exhibit the same ability.

And furthermore, some of the offenses that people complain the most about regarding TSOs could be characterized as militaristic attitudes (e.g. barking at passengers, verbal aggression, demands of unquestioning obedience). A veteran might be more likely to bring those attitudes into their work as a TSO in inappropriate ways.

All I'm saying is ... being good at one job doesn't automatically make you good at an unrelated job. Serving in the infantry and serving as an airport screener are largely unrelated jobs.
So you would rather have pizza box applicants?

Serving as an banking executive and serving as a TSAer are largely unrelated. Armed forces vet and TSAer are not. Both are charged with protecting the country.
tkey75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 12, 11:42 am   #12
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkey75 View Post
So you would rather have pizza box applicants?
Lovely non-sequitur there.

But if you're going to go there, let me point this out. The US Army recruits on pizza boxes, too:



Yet we seem to hold these pizza-box-ad-responders in higher respect than those who respond to pizza-box-ads from TSA.

My point: I'm not concerned about where someone finds out about a job. I'm concerned about whether or not they're qualified to do the job. The previous job held may, or may not, have any relevance to that question.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tkey75 View Post
Serving as an banking executive and serving as a TSAer are largely unrelated. Armed forces vet and TSAer are not. Both are charged with protecting the country.
But in completely different ways.

The vast majority of TSOs are not trained in the use of firearms in order to perform their duties, because it's not relevant. All members of the armed forces are trained in the use of firearms, because it's directly relevant. (They are "armed" forces, of course.) The missions are different; consequently, the means used to accomplish those missions are different.

And one could easily argue that banking executives also have a charge to protect our country. Banks are subjected to a host of regulations in the name of "homeland security". (Their effectiveness or appropriateness is, of course, a debate for another forum.)

Again, back to my point: prior experience in an unrelated job does not, a priori, make one qualified for the next job.
jkhuggins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 12, 11:48 am   #13
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkhuggins View Post
Again, back to my point: prior experience in an unrelated job does not, a priori, make one qualified for the next job.
And prior experience in some jobs is a disqualified for certain future jobs.

Like being a convicted heroin dealer is an immediate and prejudicial disqualifier for being a pharmacy technician - or being a TSA employee is a disqualifier for any job that requires ethics.
Caradoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 12, 12:50 pm   #14
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caradoc View Post
And prior experience in some jobs is a disqualified for certain future jobs.

Like being a convicted heroin dealer is an immediate and prejudicial disqualifier for being a pharmacy technician - or being a TSA employee is a disqualifier for any job that requires ethics.
We're drifting from the point.

Up-thread, T.J. Bender said that he'd replace all TSA screeners and supervisors with returning armed forces veterans, because they would be "infinitely more qualified". I don't think that conclusion follows as naturally as one might expect.
jkhuggins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 13, 12, 12:53 pm   #15
Suspended
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,728
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkhuggins View Post
Up-thread, T.J. Bender said that he'd replace all TSA screeners and supervisors with returning armed forces veterans, because they would be "infinitely more qualified". I don't think that conclusion follows as naturally as one might expect.
Oh, I agree with you wholeheartedly.

It's only the veterans of affairs like Abu Ghraib that I'd expect to end up in the TSA.
Caradoc is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 7:17 pm.