Go Back   > > >
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 28, 17, 12:37 pm   #16
  
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 3,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Often1 View Post
At least by my reading, TSA's authorizing statute does not provide for it to monitor checked luggage loading and off-loading. If you can point to any language which does require it to do so (rather than the name of the agency) that would be very helpful.

Now, if you think that the law ought to be changed and TSA's authority (and budget) be expanded so that it can have its Officers stand around and watch luggage being off-loaded, that is another thing.
Statute... law... authority... minutia... details... technicalities...

Does TSA's authorizing statute say that it is allowed to cut locks? Does the statute say that it's allowed to confiscate snow globes, water bottles, cupcakes, or anything else? Does the statute detail the prohibition of liquids, gels, or aerosols? Yet TSA does all of these things (all of which provide zero security benefit, cost a fortune, and make us less safe by diverting the agency's attention from looking for actual WEI).

Transportation. SECURITY. Administration.

The agency was created for one, and only one, specific purpose: to secure commercial air travel.

How does requiring baggage to be unlocked for inspection, but providing no security of any kind between inspection and baggage loading, add anything at all to the security process?

Also - why do you think there is a need for "officers" to "stand around and watch luggage being off-loaded?" In fact, why do you think we're addressing only the off-loading portion of the baggage journey? While the off-load portion does provide a brief window of opportunity (typically only minutes) for thievery by unscrupulous airline employees or others, it does not provide opportunity to smuggle explosives or weapons aboard an aircraft, since the off-loading takes place after the flight is complete.

However, TSA is tasked with securing the flight itself, and that means maintaining a chain of custody between the time the TSO verifies that "Nope, nothing boomy-boom in this here bag!" and the time the cleared bag gets loaded onto an aircraft. Since it doesn't do that, there is a wide open window of opportunity which can last for hours wherein a bad actor could slip some Pow Powder or Boom Juice into Gramma or Uncle Harvey's suitcase.

The unsecure time frame between inspection and loading is the most vulnerable part of a checked bag's journey, not only for security against terr'ism, but also for security against Light-Fingered Louis the unscrupulous baggage handler - or or Sticky-Fingered Stella, the iPad stealing TSO.
petaluma1 likes this.
WillCAD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 17, 1:12 pm   #17
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles
  
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: VNY | BUR | LAX
Programs: AAdvantage | MileagePlus
Posts: 8,443
Quote:
Originally Posted by chollie View Post
I arrive at a hotel and give my car keys to the valet to park my car.

My car is subsequently vandalized because the valet parks it and leaves the windows down and the car unlocked by someone.

Does anyone really think the hotel is off the hook because I can't prove their employee damaged my car or left it vulnerable to damage?

My 'contract' is with the hotel. The hotel is responsible for the security of my car until I get it back. I don't care if their employees have custody of my car the entire time or if part of the process involves a third-party parking garage staffed with crooked people.
A more relevant hypothetical would be leaving the car with a hotel parking valet to be taken to a car dealership for service. The car is returned damaged, i.e., scratches, dents, dings, etc. Who is responsible for the damage, the hotel or the dealership?
TWA884 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 17, 1:17 pm   #18
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
  
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 25,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by TWA884 View Post
A more relevant hypothetical would be leaving the car with a hotel parking valet to be taken to a car dealership for service. The car is returned damaged, i.e., scratches, dents, dings, etc. Who is responsible for the damage, the hotel or the dealership?
Thanks, yes, that is actually the example I was reaching for. I knew sometime in the past I'd read about liability issues surrounding a car, hotel valet, and a third party the car's owner never interacted with.
chollie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 17, 5:19 pm   #19
  
Join Date: Nov 2015
Programs: Ritz/Marriott/SPG Platinum, HH Diamond, DL Gold
Posts: 433
dumb dum dum dum dumb...add the music to this post
pharmawalk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 17, 8:12 pm   #20
FlyerTalk Evangelist
  
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 26,760
I think the real answer is cameras along the entire baggage path.
Loren Pechtel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 17, 11:16 pm   #21
  
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Israel/United States
Posts: 716
I have had my baggage opened numerous times by TSA. The only way I know it's open, is the note left-- and occasional sloppy repacking. I find they are usually looking for something that showed on an X-ray. They pull it out and don't a.ways out it back. However, my TSA locks have always been opened with a key and always relocked.
awayIgo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 28, 17, 11:24 pm   #22
  
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,320
Wait, is the TSA actually responsible for anything?
STBCypriot likes this.
s0ssos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 17, 3:47 am   #23
  
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 3,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by s0ssos View Post
Wait, is the TSA actually responsible for anything?
Only for the thousands of terr'ists and millions of kiddie porners they have catched.
WillCAD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 17, 4:50 am   #24
  
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkhuggins View Post
Trivial for a TSA screener to say "that's not my signature" when confronted with an inspection notice carrying their name.
Quote:
Originally Posted by petaluma1 View Post
Then TSA needs to come up with another method of tying notices to individual screeners which they could do if they wanted to do so.

If a screener says "not my signature" then the CCTV coverage is immediately pulled and reviewed.
"Oh, darn, the CCTV cameras weren't working."

"Oh, darn, the screener's back is to the camera, so we can't see anything."

"Oh, darn, the CCTV tape footage got deleted ... you really should've told us about this earlier so we didn't delete it."

"Oh, darn, the CCTV tape footage is so grainy that we can't tell when the bag in question got searched"

There's plenty of ways for an individual screener to evade being identified. As you point out ... until the TSA parent organization takes the lead in assuming responsibility and liability, there will be a host of ways for individual screeners to avoid responsibility too.
jkhuggins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 17, 6:07 am   #25
  
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 3,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkhuggins View Post
"Oh, darn, the CCTV cameras weren't working."

"Oh, darn, the screener's back is to the camera, so we can't see anything."

"Oh, darn, the CCTV tape footage got deleted ... you really should've told us about this earlier so we didn't delete it."

"Oh, darn, the CCTV tape footage is so grainy that we can't tell when the bag in question got searched"

There's plenty of ways for an individual screener to evade being identified. As you point out ... until the TSA parent organization takes the lead in assuming responsibility and liability, there will be a host of ways for individual screeners to avoid responsibility too.
True, but every example you just listed is one that requires more than a single actor.

If the agency itself fostered an atmosphere of professional integrity, responsibility, and accountability, that would reduce the possibilities for misconduct to those of individuals or small groups. As it stands currently, the entire agency from top to bottom is engaged in systematic misconduct and group butt-covering. Of course, that's what you get when you create an agency with no outside oversight, no clearly defined goals, no explicit legal restrictions on methodology, give it $8 billion a year, and tell it to "make us safe." It gets worse when you treat it like a law enforcement agency and hire ex-LEOs to run it, but claim that it's not subject to the same oversight and restriction as a law enforcement agency because it's not a law enforcement agency.

TSA's lack of accountability for its widespread baggage mishandling is merely one example of its lack of accountability for system misconduct and abuse of the traveling public. It's just one symptom, the root cause of which is the disease of a rogue agency with no one reigning it in.
WillCAD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 17, 8:31 am   #26
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
  
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 25,326
A TSO never acts in a vacuum. There are always at least two people, an LTSO and an STSO, tasked in part with keeping an eye on what that TSO is doing. That's aside from co-workers who observe and laugh but say nothing.

TSA really needs to replace the generous bonus program with internal bonuses for TSOs who 'see something' and 'say something'.

Instead of a getting a couple grand for groin-chopping young boys and girls, TSOs should have to earn any 'bonuses' by reporting misconduct by their peers. Turn your co-worker in for using a bolt-cutter instead of TSA locks, it gets verified on tape, and you get extra $$ in your next paycheck.
chollie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 17, 9:08 am   #27
  
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SYD (usually), GVA (occasionally)
Programs: QF PS, EK-Silver, Security Theatre Critic
Posts: 4,083
Quote:
Originally Posted by s0ssos View Post
Wait, is the TSA actually responsible for anything?
"Is" <> "should be".
RadioGirl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 17, 9:45 am   #28
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
  
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 25,326
TSA thinks it's a big joke when their screeners use bolt cutters on locks or even knives to slit open luggage instead of cutting locks.

TSA thinks it's a big joke when TSOs literally toss the contents, remove LGAs from ziplock baggies, remove the lids, and toss the opened container back in the bag.

Will TSA think it's really funny when a TSO-tossed bag catches fire because someone carefully packed spare LI batteries that TSA then opened and scattered around? Or maybe a spark catches fire on the wine or mouthwash that TSA opened and tossed back in the bag, so things really light up?

Ha ha ha, TSA. You guys are soooo funny.
chollie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 17, 10:54 am   #29
FlyerTalk Evangelist
  
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 12,719
Quote:
Originally Posted by chollie View Post
TSA thinks it's a big joke when their screeners use bolt cutters on locks or even knives to slit open luggage instead of cutting locks.

TSA thinks it's a big joke when TSOs literally toss the contents, remove LGAs from ziplock baggies, remove the lids, and toss the opened container back in the bag.

Will TSA think it's really funny when a TSO-tossed bag catches fire because someone carefully packed spare LI batteries that TSA then opened and scattered around? Or maybe a spark catches fire on the wine or mouthwash that TSA opened and tossed back in the bag, so things really light up?

Ha ha ha, TSA. You guys are soooo funny.
I'm disturb when some people seem to have no desire to hold acts committed by TSA employees accountable for their actions.

I do not understand where any concept of immunity for government employees comes from and I for one don't think police or anyone else should be exempted from legal jeopardy for their actions. Break the law and suffer the consequences. Use your office to abuse the law suffer the consequences.

If I abused my position and did something illegal I would fully expect that my employer or violated person would take action. Why would they not? It should be no different for a TSA employee.

If TSA want its screeners to grope genitals or karate chop people in the crotch then put that in TSA's guidance to employees and publish those things for public consumption. By doing those things TSA would remove any claims of improper screening by the employee.
Boggie Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 17, 11:02 am   #30
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
  
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 25,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog View Post
If TSA want its screeners to grope genitals or karate chop people in the crotch then put that in TSA's guidance to employees and publish those things for public consumption. By doing those things TSA would remove any claims of improper screening by the employee.
Better yet, cut the BS with the website and twitter and tell the truth.

Screeners can open your luggage any way they want: they can use a crowbar to break into a suitcase with a built-in lock that isn't even locked. They can cut locks and toss them into other people's bags because it's their discretion. They can remove LGAs from ziplocks, remove the lids, and toss the open containers back into the bag and TSA is fine with that. They can put other people's belongings - cut locks, BP, other items - in your bag and even lock your bag with someone else's lock. They can open carefully packed containers of LI batteries and scatter them back in the bag.

We know this is not isolated rogue baggage screeners, because every 'rogue' baggage screener is working with other TSOs, LTSOs and STSOs, all of whom are on board with what is happening.

If the default is that TSA pays any claim for damaged baggage in 30 days unless TSA pulls the tapes, provides them to the pax, and proves that they were not responsible AND any payouts come from TSA's 'bonus' budget, then TSA will have a financial incentive to stop this nonsense.

If the cameras are placed so that TSOs can easily evade them or TSA has 'lost' the footage, then TSA is one the hook for damages - payable out of their 'bonus' fund. It will incentivize TSA to put cameras on 'blind spots' and we will all be safer.
chollie is offline   Reply With Quote
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Thread Tools
Search Thread
Go to Top
Forum Jump
Contact Us - FlyerTalk - Archive - Top