Carl Johnson

That is true actually. Barney Fife had a strong sense of duty and public service - and great personal courage. Maybe it would have been better to say "clerks are cardboard caricatures of Barney Fife".

WillCAD

Your friend's reminders seem to have been in vain. But kudos to him for making the effort, doomed though it may have been to failure.

janetdoe

OK, but that was posted in April 2009, and the Bierfeldt case (The "St Louis incident" referred to in the post) was settled, with TSA vowing to change their policy, in November 2009. Are you saying that TSA has NOT changed the policy in accordance with the Bierfeldt settlement? Where is the updated policy reflecting the settlement?
Wow, I guess we need to contact Campaign For Liberty and the ACLU and tell them that TSA has NOT implemented any changes as per the court settlement.

petaluma1

Seems this experiment is turning out to be nothing but TSA Blog II.

WillCAD

You didn't really expect someone whose screen name is "TSAPressSec" to do anything less than repeat the party line, did you?

I'd rather talk to <deleted>. I disagree with him a lot, but at least he thinks for himself and sometimes disagrees with his employer, and seems to have a more reasonable attitude toward travelers than some of the other TSOs who have posted here in the past.

petaluma1

^^

halls120

And you are surprised?

petaluma1

I did have hopes. But my answer is "no."

mikeef

I hope not. It's still early in the experiment and I'll give him some time, since this isn't his only job.

Mike

chollie

This.

In his job, he should have ready access to people who can answer any and all questions, even if he can't necessarily share those answers with us. He doesn't say he ever actually trained as or worked as a screener, so it's quite possibly frequent flyers know more about some things than he does, simply based on experience (the 'name game', for example).

I say he 'should' have ready access to people who can answer questions, but that doesn't mean he does. IMHO, there's no reason there isn't a 'final authority' who can provide specific answers to any TSO in real time, but even <deleted> was unable to get an answer about nitro pills. I think the results of his efforts were that on the perpetually out-of-date website, 'can I take this?' now recognizes 'nitro pills'. It still doesn't provide an answer of course - it cites the medical rules, does not address the 'zero tolerance for some substances' rules, and still leaves the matter up to any individual TSO.

Ultimately, we have to remember that the official line is that virtually anything is up to the judgment of the individual screener, and quite often the most honest answer is going to be "that's not supposed to happen" or "That's not the way I would handle it, but...<shrug>".

Not "That's not supposed to happen, and we will work to ensure that it does not happen again".

mikeef

You hit it right on the nose. There is no official line. Just like the spoon. There is no spoon.

Ross seems to be a good guy (and possibly a masochist) who wants to help.

Mike

Boraxo

Bingo!

Kind of absurd that TSA will call the cops on anyone carrying bulk cash - there are many legitimate reasons to carry cash and the vast majority who do so are not in the illegal narcotics business or violating AML.

A better procedure would be to require TSA to file SAR forms similar to banks, rather than to detain every traveler. But of course it's more fun for TSA to pretend they are really LEOs and no doubt they are rewarded for every bust.

janetdoe

NO! TSA is not there to check for money, only WEI. They should have zero interest in any money found, and a procedure which encourages them to report would be evil.

Boraxo

I am not endorsing this role but suggesting a lesser of 2 evils. They are already encouraged to report money that should be obvious to you.

It's similar to adding precheck lines. Adding something that improves the program is not an endorsement of the program, but rather making it less onerous for those of us who are subject to it.

RadioGirl

I'm willing to give him time; I'm willing to play nice and so on and so on. But ultimately, even if he's a good guy with the best intentions in the world, he cannot, by definition, "help."

He could, for example, tell us that chollie's nitro pills ARE absolutely permitted without qualification. But the next time chollie runs into a power-hungry clerk who insist that they are NOT permitted (and you know that's going to happen), Ross is just some guy on a bulletin board who typed some stuff. Or "the rules have changed." Or "we have the authority to be more stringent here."

He has already used the well-worn line that we've heard from <deleted> and others that "that shouldn't happen." Of course it shouldn't; but it does. What can Ross do about it?

The problem is not that, up until now, we haven't been able to ask questions about TSA's policies. The problem is not that, up until now, we haven't had a TSA website that purports to answer the questions. The problem is that there is a gigantic abyss between what the TSA says "should" happen and what passengers encounter at a particular checkpoint on a particular day. Whether is gap is by design - TSA don't want to have clear rules and be consistent - or by lack of control - TSA management cannot get its screeners to follow rules consistently - doesn't matter in practice.

The only thing that could address that HERE is to have someone from TSA who is not simply a "press secretary", but someone who has authority to go back to HQ and say "this policy isn't consistent" or "this rule is being ignored" and then get it changed in the field and create consequences for checkpoints that don't comply. I'm not holding my breath.

TL;DR Anything Ross presents as "the rules" can be contradicted, without consequence, by any TSA screener at any time.